6 4 14

CITY OF SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA
DISCIPLINARY APPEAL
In the Matter of Discipline of )

Santa Maria Police Lieutenant )
)
DANIEL AST,
)
)
Petitioner/Appellant. )
_______________________________)
VOLUME III
Pages 491-752
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 2014
9:56 A.M. TO 5:19 P.M.
REPORTED BY:
YOLANDA C. HERNANDEZ
CSR No. 7389
THE HEARING IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF DANIEL AST,
was taken at Santa Maria Public Library, 421 South
McClelland Street, Santa Maria, California, before
Yolanda C. Hernandez, CSR #7389, a Certified Shorthand
Reporter for the State of California, on Wednesday,
June 4, 2014, commencing at the hour of 9:56 A.M.
7
8
9
10
11
APPEARANCES:
CATHERINE HARRIS, ESQ.
HEARING OFFICER
5960 South Land Park Drive, Suite 255
Sacramento, California 95822-3313
916.444.3317
12
13
14
15
16
17
FOR THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY CITY OF SANTA MARIA:

LAWRENCE, BEACH, ALLEN & CHOI, P.C.
BY: DENNIS M. GONZALES, ESQ.
RAYMOND W. SAKAI, ESQ.
100 West Broadway Street, Suite 1200
Glendale, California 91210
818.545.1925
dgonzales@lbaclaw.com
rsakai@lbaclaw.com
18
19
FOR THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT DANIEL AST:

20
21
22
23
24
25
NYE, PEABODY, STIRLING, HALE & MILLER, LLP

BY: JONATHAN D. MILLER, ESQ.
ALISON M. BERNAL, ESQ.
33 West Mission Street, Suite 201
Santa Barbara, California 93101
805.963.2345
jonathan@nps-law.com
alison@nps-law.com
(CONTINUED)
McDANIEL REPORTING & VIDEO CONFERENCING
Page: 492
1
2
ALSO PRESENT:
COMMANDER DONALD RODRIGUEZ
City of Santa Maria P.D.
3
4
5
GIL TRUJILLO
Santa Maria City Attorney
DANIEL AST
Petitioner/Appellant
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page: 493
INDEX
OF
WITNESSES
4
5
6
7
CITY OF SANTA MARIA:

DANIEL AST
(Pursuant to Evid. Code
Section 776)
RD
RX
658
497
--
--
8
9
PORTIONS DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL
10
(Bound Under Separate Cover)
11
(NONE)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page: 494
INDEX
OF
EXHIBITS
(Bound under separate cover)
CITY:
24 - Transcript of I.A. Interview of

Dan Ast, Part One, 9/20/12
732
25 - Transcript of I.A. Interview of

Dan Ast, Part Two 9/20/12
732
I.D.
Rec'd
7
8
9
31 - Recording of voicemail message

to Commander Green 10/2011
506
APPELLANT:
I.D.
10
11
Rec'd
12
13
14
FF - Police Department Organization

Chart as of 11/20/11
GG - Thumb Drive given to Mr. Ast upon
termination by the City
672
727
730
(Sealed)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page: 495
SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 2014
9:56 A.M.
--O0O--
4
5
THE HEARING OFFICER:
Good morning, everyone.
This is Day 3 in the Matter of the Appeal of Dan Ast.
And we spent a little time off the record getting our
exhibits in order.
9
10
Thank you to both parties for providing the

list of exhibits to accompany your binders.
11
And Mr. Gonzales, do you have a witness?
12
MR. GONZALES:
13
Thank you.
We
call Dan Ast to the stand.
14
15
I do, indeed.
Okay.
Mr. Ast, would you
raise your right hand, please.
16
17
DANIEL AST,
18
Appellant herein, called as a witness under
19
the provisions of Section 776 of the Evidence
20
Code, was duly sworn testified as follows:
21
22
THE WITNESS:
23
///
24
///
25
///
I do.
Page: 496
CROSS-EXAMINATION
(PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE CODE SECTION 776)
BY MR. GONZALES:
Good morning, sir.
Good morning.
Have you reviewed anything prior to coming to
these hearings?
Several reports.
Can you identify which ones they are, please?
10
We have reviewed the Sheriff's Department
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
report/investigation.
Q
The testimony as it pertained to me.
reviewed a lot of different paperwork.

Q
Do you have a recollection of -- can you
identify what it was?

Let me ask it this way.
Did you read through
your transcripts?
20
Partially.
21
Okay.
22
Let us
expand a little bit on exactly what it was you reviewed.
18
19
Summaries, or the actual testimony?
Did you listen to any of the audiotape
recordings of the interviews?
23
Some of them.
24
Which ones did you listen to?
25
I listened to mine, Sergeant Norling, Sergeant
Page: 497
Chris Nartatez, Chief Macagni, Craig Ritz, and there may
have been one or two others.
3
4
Okay.
Did you listen to those from the
beginning to the end?
Yes.
Did you take any notes during the course of
those reviews?
I did.
Do you have those notes with you?
10
No.
11
When was it that you last listened to those
12
tapes?
13
About a month ago.
14
Have you, since that month to today's date,
15
have you reviewed any of those by listening to them?
16
Just bits and pieces.
17
And have you reviewed the notes that you took
18
when you listened to them about a month ago?
19
No.
20
So to make sure I'm clear, about a month ago,
21
you listened to those tapes you just identified, you
22
took some notes, and then in the interim between then
23
and now, you listened to certain segments of those
24
audiotapes; am I accurate?
25
Yes.
Page: 498
In addition to that, you reviewed a number of
paper documents, but you have no independent
recollection of what those entitlements were?
Correct.
Thank you, sir.
6
7
Now, you were hired with the Santa Maria Police

Department on what day?
In June of '95 or '96.
Okay.
Let me talk just for a moment or two
10
about your relationship with Mr. Come and Ginter.
11
did you first meet Mr. Come, approximately?
12
13
When
About a year after I started working for the
Lompoc Police Department.
14
What year would that have been?
15
June of 1990.
16
And when was it you met Mr. Ginter?
17
When I started working with the Lompoc Police
18
Department.
19
Also in 1990, or was that '89?
20
It could have been '89.
21
Okay.
And in addition to having a person --
22
professional relationship with those two gentlemen, do
23
you also have a personal relationship with them?
24
Yes.
25
When I say personal, I presume you understood
Page: 499
that to mean like a social, where the wives and them --
and they and their wives would go out periodically
together.
Fair statement?
Yes.
And of course you were also very friendly on a
professional level as well; correct?
Correct.
And then when you left Lompoc PD and then came
over to Santa Maria, they came about the same time?
10
I came over first, and they came within a year.
11
And you retained that friendship both
12
professionally and socially; also correct?
13
True.
14
Let's talk a little bit about your relationship
15
with Mr. Macagni.
16
Macagni the chief?
17
18
19
20
When you went there in '95, was
No, I came over with Dan Shiner as the chief of
police.
Q
I don't have the date.
When did Macagni become
the chief of police for Santa Maria?
21
I don't know.
22
Within a couple of years after you came?
23
Chief Shiner was still here two years after I
24
25
got here, so it was sometime after that.

Q
I'm sorry.
Was that '97, '98?
Just a
Page: 500
ballpark.
I don't need the exact date.
Estimate '98, '99.
That's fine.
4
5
Thank you very much.
Now initially, when you came over, how would

you describe your relationship with Chief Macagni?
Business, professional.
Okay.
And you got some promotions from him
when you -- during the tenure that you were here, from
officer to sergeant to lieutenant; correct?
10
11
12
13
I would -- for sergeant and lieutenant I was
promoted by him.
Q
Right.
And prior to, let's say, November 2011
-- have you got that pictured in your mind, that date?
14
Yes.
15
Before that date, did you consider yourself in
16
a good relationship with the chief, Chief Macagni?
17
Professional relationship.
18
Right.
I'm talking professional.
I'm not
19
talking about social.
20
statement that you and he had a good professional
21
relationship prior to November 2011?
But would you agree with the
22
We had a fair relationship.
23
I'm sorry?
24
A fair relationship.
25
Okay.
I remember reading in one of your
Page: 501
documents, it was around November of 2011, where the
relationship changed.
that accurate?
Am I misstating anything, or is
No, you're accurate.
Thank you.
So that would mean that before, it
was a better relationship than after November 11,
2000 -- November of 2011; correct?
Correct.
Something happened in 2011, November-ish, that
10
caused this change.
11
Yes.
12
All right.
13
Am I also accurate?
What month was it that you went to
Israel in 2011?
14
October --
15
October?
16
-- I believe.
17
Late October?
18
Mid to late October, I believe.
19
Great place, isn't it?
20
Yes.
21
When you got back from your trip to Israel,
22
some changes had been made, hadn't they?
23
Yes.
24
As a matter of fact, that's when your personal
25
or your county vehicle was taken away; correct?
Page: 502
My city car, yes.
City car?
Yes.
Excuse me.
And overtime had been given to --
exclusively to Flores and whoever he designated;
correct?
No, there was still some overtime available.
I'm sorry, sir?
There was still overtime available.
10
Okay.
11
When you got back and you heard about
these changes, you were upset, weren't you?
12
13
about.
14
I wasn't happy with them, the way they came
And as a matter of fact, you were extremely
15
unhappy when you learned about these changes, especially
16
having your car taken away?
17
I wasn't happy with that.
18
And you let Kendall -- Commander Kendall Green
19
know about that in a phone call, didn't you?
20
Probably.
21
I'm going to play an exhibit -- we're going to
22
23
24
25
call this -- what exhibit?

I'm going to identify it first, but I need to
know what the exhibit number is.
Okay.
We'll have to give

Page: 503
it an exhibit number, but it's been my experience that
in most cases where a digital recording is played and
it's going to be introduced into evidence that it will
not be necessary for the reporter to transcribe what is
played on the recording.
the parties?
Would that be the desire of
MR. GONZALES:
MR. MILLER:
This exhibit hasn't been previously provided or
So stipulated.
Potentially.
Let me ask this.
10
identified.
11
be introduced for the purpose of impeachment.
12
13
MR. GONZALES:
Let me ask a couple preliminary
questions.
14
15
I'm assuming that it's going to attempt to
MR. MILLER:
Let me ask this question.
What is
the exhibit?
16
MR. GONZALES:
The exhibit is a telephone call
17
from Ast to Kendall Green wherein he goes into great
18
detail about his being upset about the car being taken
19
away.
20
MR. MILLER:
21
MR. GONZALES:
22
MR. MILLER:
23
MR. GONZALES:
24
MR. MILLER:
25
MR. GONZALES:
Okay.
And a number of other -Who recorded the call?
Kendall Green.
With whose consent?
It's a telephone message that

Page: 504
was left by him on his recording machine.
2
3
by Mr. Ast on Mr. Green's recording machine?
4
5
MR. GONZALES:
Precisely.
He was not in at the
time.
MR. GONZALES:
A telephone message left
All right.
Let's go ahead and play that if
you would, please.
All right.
So may I
10
assume that the parties are in agreement that it will
11
not be necessary for the reporter to transcribe the
12
digital recording as the digital recording can be made
13
an exhibit and placed in the record?
14
MR. GONZALES:
15
MR. MILLER:
16
I would interpose another objection just in
So stipulated.
We would agree with that.
17
terms of relevance.
18
internal affairs investigation file, and it wasn't
19
provided as part of what the evidence was upon which the
20
chief relied, so again --
21
22
This wasn't provided as part of the

noted.
And, of course --
23
MR. MILLER:
24
25
Well, your objection is
Sure.
-- whether or not the
objection would be meritorious would depend on the
Page: 505
purpose for which this is being offered.
MR. MILLER:
I understand.
So let's go forward.
guess we're going to go off the record to hear the tape
or to hear the recording.
Off the record for a moment.
MR. GONZALES:
(The digital recording was played.)
Yeah.
Let's go back on the
10
record.
11
recording that was just played, and that's a recording
12
of a voicemail message, appellant's voicemail message to
13
Commander Green, dated what?
And I'm going to mark for identification the
14
MR. GONZALES:
15
16
End of October 2011.

Okay.
That's marked for
identification, and you may proceed.
17
MR. GONZALES:
18
(Exhibit 31 was marked for identification.)
19
20
21
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
You indicated that you felt you were being
thrown under the bus.
Do you recall that statement?
22
Yes.
23
What did you mean by that?
24
That while I was out of town that certain
25
decisions had been made without me having any input into
Page: 506
it and that they weren't to my advantage.
2
3
I'm going to ask you to pull that mic just a
little closer to you if you would.
Okay.
I will.
And you had also made a reference to a group,
you're being grouped with a bunch of other people.
were you referring to when you made that reference?
Lieutenant Come and Lieutenant Ginter.
10
And you indicated you did not want to be
11
grouped with some other people.
12
you say you did not want to be grouped with these
13
others?
14
15
18
19
What did you mean when
I meant grouped with people
that are negative people.
16
17
Oh, I'm sorry.
Who
Who were the negative people you were referring
Just people in general that are negative, that
to?
have a negative working attitude.
20
You didn't have anyone in mind in particular?
21
No, just people in the agency that are
22
23
24
25
negative.
Q
And did you feel that Lieutenant Flores was one
of those negative people?

A
No.
Page: 507
1
2
So you were just talking in general, but didn't
have anybody specific in mind when you said that?
Correct.
And you were placed as an oversight over
detectives.
assignments; correct?
Apparently there was a transfer of
Correct.
And how long -- and that continued on for some
period of time, didn't it?
10
Yes.
11
You didn't have a problem with that, though,
12
did you, that transfer of assignments?
13
Are you asking in the
14
whole reorganization or just that part of it that
15
pertained to him?
16
17
MR. GONZALES:
him.
18
19
clear.
20
BY MR. GONZALES:
21
Just that part pertaining to
Just so the record is
Go ahead.
If I understood the tape correctly, you
22
indicated after -- you had stated that you were given a
23
couple of extra assignments, but you had no problem with
24
that part of it.
25
I'm not misstating anything, am I?
No.
Page: 508
But then you went on to say that you needed to
have a justification for that car being taken away;
correct?
Correct.
And did you ever get that justification?
Yes.
There was a follow-up meeting approximately
November 10, 2011; accurate?
Correct.
10
And was it at that occasion that Chief Macagni
11
indicated to you what the justification was?
12
Yes.
13
And what did he say?
14
He said that I was no longer going to be doing
15
anything other than oversight over the detective bureau,
16
meaning I was only going to be doing their annual
17
evaluations for the three sergeants that worked there,
18
and I wasn't going to have any more day-to-day
19
operations or inter-working with them.
20
their boss just meant that I was going to do three
21
evaluations per year, and I wasn't going to be working
22
with the detectives on a day-to-day basis.
23
24
25
And so me being
I'm going to ask you to keep your voice up a
little bit if you could for me.

A
Okay.
Page: 509
2
3
Thank you, sir.

Did he indicate to you also that there were
budget constraints and issues that he had to face?
I don't remember that.
Well, you obviously were in the department.
You knew the economy around this period of time;
correct?
Correct.
You also knew that the City was going through
10
some budget issues; correct?
11
Correct.
12
You also knew that those budget issues would
13
have overlapped into the different departments,
14
including the police department; correct?
15
Yes.
16
And being an intelligent man and being in the
17
City for some period of time and knowing about budget
18
cuts, you realized that there had to be something taken
19
away as opposed to more stuff coming in; fair statement?
20
Yes.
21
Despite the fact that you knew that and your
22
car was going to be taken away, you were still upset
23
with that; correct?
24
Yes.
25
Did you ever figure out about how much money
Page: 510
that would come to in having your vehicle taken away
from you, your city vehicle?
I don't believe so.
It was going to cost you some extra money,
though, wasn't it?
Yes.
You said you didn't want to be -- you wanted to
be in a happy place.
meant by that.
I didn't quite understand what you
10
That I was just coming back from vacation.
11
And when you heard the news that your city car
12
was going to be taken away, you were not in a happy
13
place anymore?
14
Correct.
15
When you indicated in your tape you did not
16
want to be that kind of employee, what kind of an
17
employee was it that you were referring to?
18
One that complains.
19
I'm sorry, sir?
20
One that complains.
21
You didn't feel like you complained before; is
22
that right?
23
Say that again?
24
You did not feel that you were the kind of
25
employee that complained before November of 2011; is
Page: 511
1
2
3
4
5
that correct?
A
I didn't complain a whole lot about a whole lot
of things.
Q
But after November 2011, that's when you became
a person, an employee, that complained?
Yes.
And then you made a reference, this is going to
be expensive for the agency.
lawsuit?
Were you threatening a
10
No, in a grievance where they look into it.
11
"It's going to cost a lot of money and a lot of
12
13
14
15
grief."
A
What did you mean by that?

That it's expensive to investigate these
things.
Q
And again, being an intelligent man, a person
16
that's been involved with the city, both the Lompoc beat
17
before and a few years here at Santa Maria, and you knew
18
about the budget constraints and the money issues that
19
the city had to face, what did you expect that grievance
20
to indicate to you?
21
I'm not sure I understand the question.
22
And please, any question I ask you, if you
23
don't understand it or need clarification, please ask me
24
to do so.
25
I'd be more than happy to.

I want to know, Mr. Ast, what you expected to
Page: 512
have this grievance conclude.
going to come to?
find?
What did you think they were going to
That you were entitled to a car?
4
5
What did you think it was
That there was no justification for taking the
car away.
And then finally, you indicated earlier you
didn't want to be that kind of employee.
that.
that kind of person.
10
You discussed
At the very end, you said, I didn't want to be

You mean the same thing, or were
you referring to something else?
11
Same thing.
12
At any point in time, do you have an estimate
13
as to how much money you thought you were going to be
14
losing by having that city car taken away from you?
15
I didn't know.
16
This was a money issue, was it not?
17
There would be some financial attachment to it.
18
At this time, did Come have his car taken away,
19
Mr. Come?
Did he have his car taken away?
20
21
place.
22
How about Ginter?
23
Same.
24
I remember reading their complaints or their
25
He never had a car assigned to him in the first
grievances, and they were talking about having a car
Page: 513
taken away, and they didn't have a car.
Was that a question?
Yeah.
My question is, at no point in time did
they ever have a car --
Correct.
-- that was taken way?
Correct.
How would you describe, in November '11, your
relationship with Lieutenant Flores?
10
Difficult.
11
Can you elaborate on that?
Bad communication with each other, difficult to
12
13
14
Difficult in what
way?
be around him.
15
Why is that, sir?
16
Because he's a -- he was a very lazy person and
17
I didn't appreciate laziness.
18
wasn't sharing the workload, so it was difficult to just
19
be around him.
20
He wasn't working.
He
Now, after that November 10, 2011 meeting,
21
Lieutenant Flores was given a take-home car, and he also
22
had a motorcycle that he could go to and from work and
23
home; correct?
24
Correct.
25
Is it also accurate, sir, that prior to that
Page: 514
November -- November 2011, he had written a grant, a
federal grant, where certain monies were apportioned to
the city police department?
I don't know if he wrote it or Jesse Silva
wrote it.
grant.
You're not sure which one of the two?
No.
As a result of whomever wrote that grant,
It might have been Jesse Silva who wrote the
10
monies were given for specific purposes to the police
11
department; correct?
12
Correct.
13
And the specific purpose was for, say, DUI
14
checkpoints and some other items like that; right?
15
Correct.
16
And he at the time was assigned the motor
17
division or motor unit?
18
Yes.
19
And the motor unit we know is motorcycles?
20
Yes.
21
And they do primarily the DUI checkpoints?
22
Yes.
23
And the officers that were assigned to that
24
25
particular unit were given overtime; correct?

A
Yes.
Page: 515
1
2
And it was up to Lieutenant Flores as to who
obtained those -- that overtime; correct?
Correct.
And you were not included in that, were you?
No, I was not.
And neither was Come or Ginter?
Correct.
And you were upset about that, weren't you?
No, I wouldn't call it upset.
10
Well, you describe -- how would you call it?
11
For me personally, it wasn't that big of a
12
deal.
13
some financial difficulties at one time and was hoping
14
to get some overtime and was told no, and so I thought
15
that that was wrong.
16
I know that a friend of mine, Jim Ginter, had
Now, I would like to read from Page 30 -- well,
17
let me identify what this is.
18
interview of Mr. -- at the time, Lieutenant Ast, to the
19
internal investigation, involving the claim by them, to
20
a Bart Topham.
21
22
MR. GONZALES:
23
24
25
This is a March 7, 2012
Is that an exhibit?
It will be when I mark it now.

Okay.
Can we pass it out
before it's read into the record, please?

MR. GONZALES:
I only have the one copy.
I
Page: 516
think you've got a copy.
MR. MILLER:
Here's another issue I have.
This
is part of the Motion to Compel.
investigation.
on Day 3, when I asked for the investigation up front.
And they're going to use it now in this hearing.
is the investigation by Bart Topham into my client's
retaliation complaints.
compel, and you reserved on it.
This was the Topham
Here we are in the middle of the hearing
This
And it was the one we tried to
10
11
MR. MILLER:
Oh, right.
Here is the City wanting to read
12
from it now.
13
any statements that were made, no chance to review the
14
materials.
15
My clients never had a chance to review
Let's take a short
16
recess, and if it's going to be used I think it should
17
be supplied.
18
19
MR. GONZALES:
It's going to be used for
impeachment.
20
21
MR. GONZALES:
Well --
As we all know, when you impeach
22
somebody, there's no need to provide the other side with
23
the document.
24
25
MR. MILLER:
May I be heard on this for one
moment?
Page: 517
MR. MILLER:
Yes.
This is the most absurd thing I've
ever heard.
objections in this whole hearing, but this is the
investigation into my client's retaliation complaints
with the City, complaints which were founded against the
chief, which you heard yesterday resulted in part of the
decision to remove Macagni, and they refused to give it.
They don't want us to know the whole story just like the
I've sat very quietly through evidentiary
10
other report that we had to fight for.
11
very interesting story that we've learned what really
12
came out in that wash as well.
13
have viewed selective bits and pieces of this
14
investigation for their benefit, but they don't want it
15
to be used against them for their detriment, and I think
16
that's a complete due process violation for Mr. Ast.
17
And that was a
And here they want to
All right.
Well, I think
18
perhaps the time has come to revisit the whole subject
19
of the retaliation investigation or the -- so my
20
suggestion is that we'll take a short break, and then
21
I'm going to hear argument on that aspect of the Motion
22
to Compel, and I'll rule on it, and we're going to have
23
to interrupt the testimony here for a moment until we
24
get this resolved.
25
MR. GONZALES:
If I can be heard.
Maybe we can
Page: 518
bypass this for right now, and I'll come back to it at
an appropriate time for a break.
I want to go through this testimony.
If the
hearing officer has no objection, I will move on to a
new topic.
We can discuss this element later.
All right.
If you're
going to bypass this element and then turn to something
else where you don't have to reference this report --
MR. GONZALES:
10
Absolutely.
-- and then -- are you
11
going to still want to question the witness using the
12
report at a later time?
13
MR. GONZALES:
14
Absolutely.
Okay.
So we'll just --
15
we'll go 'til our mid-morning break on other topics, and
16
then when we come back we can revisit this issue.
17
MR. GONZALES:
18
19
MR. MILLER:
20
21
22
Precisely.
Okay.
Very well.
Thank you.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
You're familiar with some -- you were here, of
course, throughout the hearing thus far; correct?
23
Yes.
24
And you recall a policy that was made reference
25
to, Rapid Deployment Policy?
Page: 519
Correct.
You were not familiar with that during the
investigation of the Covarrubias incident; correct?
I don't recall that I had ever read it.
I'm sorry, sir?
I didn't recall ever reading it.
As a lieutenant, would that not be something
that you should have been familiar with?
If it were provided to me.
10
Did you have access to a Policies and
11
Procedures for Santa Maria Police Department back in
12
November of 2011?
13
Yes.
14
Okay.
Tell me if you would, though, what your
15
understanding back then would have been procedurally
16
under the following circumstances.
17
following, if you would.
18
that claims to be suicidal, and he's armed.
19
approximately 1 o'clock in the morning in the City of
20
Santa Maria, and you were the lead lieutenant to put a
21
plan together to deal with that situation.
22
Assume the
Assume that there's a civilian

It's
Are you with me on this hypothetical, sir?
23
Yes.
24
Fairly similar to what we had with the
25
Covarrubias incident; fair?
Page: 520
Yes.
With one exception, which we'll get to in a
moment.
Under those circumstances, what would be your
direction and plan as to how to handle that situation?
6
7
-- a -- the description of who the individual is.
8
9
MR. GONZALES:
It's a civilian, and a man about
29 years old who has a gun.
10
morning.
11
blow his brains out.
12
ex-lieutenant is:
13
handle that circumstance?
14
I'm sorry, I missed the
He's suicidal.
It's at 1 o'clock in the
He's claiming he's going to
And my question to this
How would he formulate a plan to
MR. MILLER:
Pardon me.
This is going to be a
15
long day if we're going to sit here and answer
16
hypothetical questions all day.
17
to be discussed here.
18
at best, but anyway I just think --
19
There's a lot of facts
It's an incomplete hypothetical
Well, I understand that.
20
I understand that it doesn't incorporate all of the
21
facts and circumstances that are present in the scenario
22
involving Officer Covarrubias.
23
completely.
24
hypothetical as what policies govern the handling of a
25
situation involving a potential suicide who is armed.
I understand that
But I guess the question is not so much a
Page: 521
I mean isn't that really what you're driving at?
MR. GONZALES:
7
8
9
So I don't think it's
really a hypothetical in the strict sense of the word.
5
6
Yes, it is.
Let's go forward.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
How would you handle that?
What's the policy
back then?
A
I don't know what the policy is, but I would
10
handle it by having a team of people together to make
11
contact with that person and demand that he drop his
12
gun, and then take him into custody, and then continue
13
an investigation afterwards.
14
15
Okay.
team together.
To make sure I understand you, you get a

How many persons would be in this team?
16
It all depends on what your resources are.
17
Let's say you have 50 guys.
18
19
20
How many folks
would you need?

A
Probably in Santa Maria, we would use on a case
like that maybe four or five cars.
21
Okay.
22
Yes.
23
So that's four or five guys?
24
Right.
25
And would they drive -- describe to me, if you
One-man cars?
Page: 522
will, the scenario that you would have put together.
You got four or five guys in single-unit cars.
they do?
What do
What do you tell them to do?

That they would drive into the area.
They
would locate the suspect or the person with the gun, and
that they would make contact with him.
7
8
How do they make contact?
Describe that,
please.
They would walk up between cars or wherever so
10
that there's some level of safety and make contact with
11
him.
12
They would walk up between cars?
13
Something with cover.
14
And then how -- when you say "walk up," what do
15
you mean by that?
16
I mean walk up on foot.
17
Okay.
18
As opposed to driving up.
19
Okay.
20
Toward him, close to him.
21
How?
22
To --
23
How close would you estimate?
Walk up --
walk up to him?
24
to you?
25
could, please, sir.
Closer?
Further?
Closer than I am
Give me an idea if you
Page: 523
It depends on the cover.
Well, you're in the open.
He's in the
intersection.
Then you'd want some good distance.
So wouldn't you want to isolate him?
Yes.
Wouldn't you want to contain him?
Yes.
Wouldn't you want to have a negotiator try to
10
talk him down?
11
Yes.
12
What you would not do is walk up to him and try
13
to grab him and take him to the ground, would you?
14
We've done that before.
15
My question is, would you have suggested that
16
would be a good plan under those circumstances, sir?
17
MR. MILLER:
18
THE WITNESS:
19
MR. MILLER:
20
Incomplete -No.
-- hypothetical.
Yeah, we're talking about
21
all we know is it's somebody who is armed and who has
22
made statements about wanting to commit suicide, and
23
they're in the middle of an intersection?
24
MR. GONZALES:
25
That's correct.
Okay.
Just so we're all

Page: 524
on the same page.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Okay.
And would you get a negotiator out there?
If it went for a period of time.
Okay.
And what kind of a period of time would
you estimate would be reasonable?
If it went past probably 15 minutes.
Add one more factor.
He knows tactics.
10
Everything else is the same.
Would your tactics change or be the same?
11
12
He's a police officer.
I don't know.
That's a hard question to
answer.
13
Well, it was a question that was posed to you,
14
sir, back in January 28th, 2012, when Mr. Covarrubias --
15
Officer Covarrubias was in that exact situation.
16
armed.
17
you had two sergeants go up to him and grab him, which
18
differs substantially, sir, than what you just testified
19
to.
He was
He had said he was going to commit suicide.
And
Correct?
20
Correct.
21
So you didn't follow policy when you had those
22
sergeants try to take Mr. Covarrubias into custody, did
23
you?
24
MR. MILLER:
25
Objection.
Lacks foundation.
Sustained.
Page: 525
1
2
3
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
to when Covarrubias was to be arrested; correct?
4
5
MR. MILLER:
Objection.
Lacks foundation.
Overbroad.
6
7
Well, you knew all the circumstances leading up
I'm sorry, may I have
that question again, please?
(The record was read as follows:
"Q
Well, you knew all the circumstances
10
leading up to when Covarrubias was to be
11
arrested; correct?")
12
Okay.
I'll allow the
13
question, but I'm not sure what you mean by "all the
14
circumstances."
15
16
Can you be a little clearer?
MR. GONZALES:
Q
Sure.
What were the circumstances leading up to your
17
decision to have the two sergeants make the arrest as
18
you had done on the 28th?
19
That he was -- Covarrubias was near a DUI
20
checkpoint trailer and that they were going to drive up,
21
make contact with him, and I was going to follow behind
22
in my car with the passenger officer and allow them time
23
to get there and make contact with him.
24
were going to make contact with him as soon as they made
25
the original contact with him.
And then we
And that Lieutenant

Page: 526
Flores was going to be there to assist in the event that
he started fighting with them, and he could be there to
be a helper.
4
5
When you say fighting, are you talking about
fistfight or are you talking about firing his weapon?
Anything.
When you were --
Resistive.
I'm sorry, sir?
10
Resistive.
11
And when you say the word "contact," define
12
Any type of fighting.
that, please, if you could.
13
To make contact with him.
14
I understand the word "contact."
Is that
15
verbally contact him, touching contact?
16
talking about when you use the word "contact"?
What are you
17
I would say verbally contacting him, initially.
18
And what distance away would you estimate that
19
20
they should have been to make that verbal contact?

A
Well, since we're going for the element of
21
surprise, in our instance they would have to be
22
relatively close.
23
24
25
You said -- I'm sorry.
Did you say they did
have a surprise?
A
If they were going for the element of surprise,
Page: 527
1
2
then they would have to be relatively close.

Q
In the scenario that we knew that existed at
the time, you knew that he potentially had some idea
that there was a possible investigation involving him
and a minor; correct?
Correct.
And did you believe that surprise was a
reasonable belief on your part under those
circumstances?
10
I was hoping for it.
11
I'm sorry, sir?
12
I was hoping for it.
13
You were hoping for it.
And you were willing
14
to put two sergeants in a situation that you were
15
hopeful that there would be surprise?
16
Well, I wasn't putting them in a position.
It
17
was Commander Ritz, ultimately, that oversaw it, but I
18
was hoping that we would still have an element of
19
surprise.
20
Who was the senior person on scene?
21
or Ritz?
22
the location where Covarrubias was.
Was it you
When I say "on scene," I'm talking about at
23
Myself.
24
And certainly you would agree with this
25
proposition, would you not, that a senior officer, in
Page: 528
your case, a lieutenant, can change a plan if safety
comes into issue; correct?
Yes.
You said that in your statement as a matter of
fact, didn't you?
I don't remember.
Okay.
So if a plan is put together, and during
the course of the execution of that plan it becomes
apparent that safety is at issue, the senior officer, in
10
your case the lieutenant, can change that plan;
11
accurate?
12
Yes.
13
You didn't see that as a safety issue, going
14
upon someone who you hoped might be surprised, despite
15
the fact that he knew that there was an investigation
16
involving him and he was armed?
17
18
that?
19
question here.
20
What is "that"?
"That"?
I'm sorry, you didn't see

I'm not following the
You seem to be implying that something happened
21
since the witness says that they had a plan with the
22
Commander.
23
developed?
24
25
Are you suggesting that maybe something new
MR. GONZALES:
Well, I'm suggesting that he is
-- let me reask the question if I may.
Page: 529
1
2
Okay.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Did you see any safety issues when you went out
there, knowing that he was knowledgable of a potential
investigation that involved him, and that he was armed,
obviously?
I saw that as an issue.
You saw that as an issue?
Uh-huh.
10
What issue was it that you saw?
11
That's just one more thing that we had to deal
12
13
Yes.
with.
Q
But what you would be dealing with is an armed
14
officer who may not -- will probably not be surprised
15
because he knew that he was involved in the
16
investigation, and he said he was going to commit
17
suicide.
18
19
20
21
Correct?
Well, he didn't know for sure if he was
involved in the investigation, so no.

Q
Did you believe that there was a good chance
that he knew about the investigation?
22
I believed it was possible.
23
Okay.
24
25
Did you know that Lieutenant Flores was
a negotiator back in November 2 -- or in January 2012?

A
Yes.
Page: 530
1
2
And did you contemplate or think about using
him as a negotiator to try to talk Covarrubias down?
If need be.
Did you mention that to Flores?
That he was a negotiator?
Did you ask him to assist as a negotiator to
try to talk Covarrubias down?
I asked him to assist in the arrest, yes.
Let me ask you very specifically, sir.
Did you
10
ask specifically Lieutenant Flores to be a negotiator
11
and talk Covarrubias down?
12
No.
13
Let's move on a little bit.
14
We'll go back to
this a little later on in the sequence of events.
15
On Thursday, January 26, about 4:00 p.m.,
16
Officer Paul Van Meel came to you and told you about
17
something; correct?
18
Correct.
19
And what he told you was that there had been
20
information he had just received within a few minutes,
21
literally, of Officer Covarrubias possibly having --
22
molesting a 17-year-old Explorer; correct?
23
Not that I remember.
24
You tell us what you were told.
25
That he had the information for a couple of
Page: 531
1
2
3
4
hours, waited for me to come to work.

Q
Okay.
And then what did he tell you when you
came to work?
A
That he had -- there was the possibility of an
inappropriate relationship between a female Explorer
with our agency and one of our officers.
7
8
Did anything take place that day other than the
information being provided to you?
Yes.
10
On the 26th?
11
12
What else took place?

A
We met with Commander Ritz and formulated a
13
team of who would possibly -- who would be investigating
14
that particular complaint.
15
16
And what was told to Ritz?
The same thing that
had been told to you?
17
Yes.
18
And the team that you had put together was
19
Ruiz, Flaa, Van Meel?
20
MR. MILLER:
21
testimony.
22
BY MR. GONZALES:
Lacks foundation, misstates his
23
Tell us who the team was, who the makeup was.
24
I believe the team was -- for the
25
investigators?
Page: 532
Yes, sir, the ones that were going to
investigate the Covarrubias possible involvement with a
minor.
It was going to be Paul Van Meel, Alfredo Ruiz,
Steve Best, and I didn't -- I don't think I knew that
Terry Flaa was going to be involved until the next day.
7
8
After you got the names of the team together,
what physically else was done on the 26th?
10
team together?
11
together.
12
singular or "you" plural.
13
14
15
Who put the
I'm not clear on who put the team
Because "you" could be you either "you"
MR. GONZALES:
Q
Excuse me.
Could we get clear on that?
Certainly.
Who put the team together?
Who was that
person?
16
Ultimately, it was Commander Ritz.
17
Who actually named the persons?
18
Was it you or
Ritz, and then Ritz just okayed it?
19
I think people were throwing out names.
20
My question to you, sir, was there an
21
individual that put that team together, and if so, who
22
was that person?
23
I think it was more than one person.
I think
24
it was a group of people that were putting out names out
25
there.
Page: 533
There were four people that eventually ended up
being on that team:
only three at that time -- and Van Meel; right?
4
5
6
7
Ruiz, Best, Flaa -- or actually
Van Meel, Alfredo Ruiz, and Steve Best I think
were the originals.

Q
Those are the three I just mentioned.
I want
to know who threw the names out.
Probably everybody.
When you say "everybody," does that include --
10
who's everybody?
11
Myself, Craig Ritz, Paul Van Meel.
12
All three said the same names at the same time?
13
Well, somebody would throw out a name, and
14
people would agree with it and that type of thing.
15
I'm sorry, was -- there
16
were four names that were mentioned:
17
and Van Meel.
Was Flaa in there?
18
THE WITNESS:
19
20
Best, Ruiz, Flaa,
Or --
I don't think Flaa was in there.

Okay.
Thank you.
BY MR. GONZALES:
21
What else happened on the 26th?
22
I think that was it for the 26th.
23
Did you give any direction at that point?
24
No.
25
Did Ritz give any direction at that point?
Page: 534
Yes.
What did he say?
That we would begin -- start the investigation
the following day.
On the 27th?
On the 27th.
And did anything else happen that day, the
26th, rather?
Not that I recall.
10
About what time of day was this, ballpark?
11
Now we're getting into probably 5 o'clock in
12
13
14
the evening.
Q
And you were on at that time; correct?
That
was your shift?
15
Yes.
16
Ritz went home, didn't he?
17
Yes.
18
That was the end of his shift, about 4:00 or
19
4:30; correct?
20
Yes.
21
So you would have been the one that would have
22
been in charge at the station, assuming anything else
23
needed to be done concerning this investigation;
24
accurate?
25
MR. MILLER:
That's a little overbroad and
Page: 535
lacks foundation.
2
3

the question?
4
5
6
Well, do you understand
THE WITNESS:
Can you read it back to me?
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
Of course, we can.
If there was any more direction that needed to
be done concerning the investigation, you were the
person on scene to do it; correct?
10
You were at the
station?
11
I was at the station.
12
And Ritz was not?
13
Correct, Ritz was not.
14
Nothing else happens that day or that night
15
regarding this incident as far as investigation;
16
correct?
17
Not that I'm aware of.
18
And what do you know takes place on the 27th,
19
Friday?
20
Do you want me to start at the beginning or --
21
Yeah, I want to know what, in chronological
22
order, regarding this particular investigation, what do
23
you know that takes place the next day?
24
25
I came to work about 4 o'clock in the
afternoon, maybe 4:10 in the afternoon.
Page: 536
Let me just stop you there if I can.

From the early morning to 4 o'clock in the
afternoon, were you given any information as to what was
being done on the investigation involving Covarrubias?
No.
Did you know in advance that the investigators,
Van Meel and Ruiz, were going to go out and interview
the reporting party, the female mother figure we'll call
her?
10
No.
11
You did not know that?
12
No.
13
When did you first learn that there had been
14
contact with the reporting party on the 27th?
15
I think that's when I got back to work.
16
4 o'clock, 4:30?
17
No, it was after that.
18
19
It was closer to 5:00,
I believe.
Q
And did you have any contact with Van Meel from
20
the time that you last saw him on the evening of the
21
26th, up until approximately just before 5 o'clock on
22
the 27th?
23
No.
24
Weren't you responsible to keep an eye on or to
25
check on the progress of the investigation?
Page: 537
No.
That was not your responsibility?
No.
You're claiming that it was Ritz's?
Yes.
And do you know whether Ritz did it or not?
No.
And did you ever make inquiry?
No.
10
Did you not care about what was going to happen
11
to a fellow officer in regards to an alleged
12
molestation?
13
Yes.
14
And yet, you did not do anything in regards to
15
finding out what the -- what was transpiring during that
16
time period?
17
No.
18
At approximately a little before 5 o'clock,
19
20
when you talked to Van Meel, what was that discussion?

A
That discussion was me bringing him a name of
21
the Jane Doe in this case and then him telling me that
22
he had just got the name himself, probably at the same
23
time I was getting the name.
24
25
He told you that he was getting the name of
Jane Doe about the same time as you, which would have
Page: 538
been 5:00 p.m. on the 27th?
Is that what you're saying?
Something like that, words to that effect.
Now, did we leave something out in the
discussion of the 26th, regarding who you had decided
not to tell, keep confidential from -- the investigation
from?
Did we leave something out?
Let me withdraw it and reask it.
Was there ever a discussion on the 26th that
10
Flores, the chief, Macagni, and Green were not to be
11
informed about the investigation involving Covarrubias?
12
Well, with the --
13
Is that a yes or a no?
I mean, I'm not trying
14
to cut you off, but I just want know whether or not
15
there had been a discussion on the 26th about that.
16
17
I'd have to clarify for you.

Yeah, I don't think he
18
can answer a compound question like that "yes" or "no."
19
BY MR. GONZALES:
20
All right.
21
There was conversation that there wouldn't be
Please explain.
22
-- there would be no specifics given to Flores or
23
Commander Green, but that Ritz would have to be the one
24
that would be taking care of informing the chief of
25
police.
Page: 539
1
2
And why was it -- who was it that decided that
Flores should not be informed?
The group.
Everybody said it at the exact same time?
Pretty much.
They all just said -- and when you say "they
all," who are they?
That's myself, Commander Ritz, and Paul Flores.
How about Paul Van Meel?
10
I'm sorry.
11
Sure.
12
And I believe Alfredo Ruiz might have been
13
14
15
Paul Van Meel.
there as well.
Q
So all four of you at the exact same moment
said, "Don't tell Flores."
Is that your recollection?
16
That's my recollection.
17
And all four of you said at the exact same
18
19
time, "Don't tell Green."

A
Is that your recollection?
We were -- it was a question that was -- who
20
should we not tell, could they be trusted, and that was
21
-- everybody agreed that those people shouldn't be told
22
with the specifics of the case because they couldn't be
23
trusted.
24
25
And you're certain, sitting here today under
oath, that you had no idea that Van Meel was going to go
Page: 540
out and talk to the reporting party earlier that day?
On the 26th?
On the 27th.
No, I think he was asking
did -- are you asking him if he knew on the 26th that --
that Van Meel was going to go out and talk to the
reporting party on the 27th.
think.
MR. GONZALES:
10
11
12
That's the ambiguity, I
That's a fair clarification.
Yeah.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
By the 27th, before you go to work at
13
5 o'clock, were you aware that Van Meel was going to go
14
out and talk to the reporting party?
15
I don't believe I was.
16
And you're fairly certain about that?
17
As I sit here today, I don't believe I knew it.
18
Do you remember talking to an investigator
19
subsequent to the incident of the 28th, a Klapakis?
20
Klapakis?
21
Yes.
22
Yes.
23
And that was tape-recorded, wasn't it?
24
Yes.
25
And do you recall telling him that you were
Page: 541
aware that there was a contact to be made earlier in the
day, but that there was some question about getting the
Jane Doe's name?
4
5
6
7
Yeah, but I'm not sure when they were going to
go make that inquiry or attempt to do it.

Q
Do you recall it was around 5 o'clock, when you
had gotten the information from Flores?
MR. GONZALES:
Pardon me?
10
11
MR. GONZALES:
12
THE WITNESS:
13
Flores?
14
BY MR. GONZALES:
15
5 o'clock on what date?
5 o'clock on what date?
The 27th.
I'd gotten the information from
My question is very specific.
Was it around
16
5 o'clock that you had talked to Van Meel and told him
17
that you had the Jane Doe's name from Flores?
18
Yes.
19
And it's your belief that Van Meel says, "Oh,
20
what a coincidence, I just got it around this exact same
21
time also," or words to that effect?
22
recollection?
23
24
25
Is that your
He said, "Oh, probably about the same time you
were getting the name I was getting the name."

Q
And what time would you estimate it was that
Page: 542
you were getting the name from Flores?
About 4:45.
Okay.
Quarter to 5:00.
On the 27th, of course?
Yes.
Now, why was it that you would go to Flores
About quarter to 5:00?
when all four of you at the same time said we can't
trust Flores with any of this information?
10
Because I wasn't going to get into the
11
specifics of the investigation, and also because he was
12
the lieutenant in charge, and I wanted to respect his
13
authority.
14
15
Did you not think you could get it from any
other source?
16
I didn't know if we could or not.
17
Did you attempt to get it from another source?
18
No.
19
Why is that?
20
Because the most obvious source would be, when
21
I got there at work, was the person standing in front of
22
me.
23
24
25
Well, but that person standing in front of you,
Flores -- am I accurate?
A
Yes.
Page: 543
1
2
-- was someone that you did not feel was
trustworthy to keep it confidential; also accurate?
It's accurate, but I figured if I told him not
to say anything, that he could keep it confidential,
then he could keep it confidential.
Forgive me for being confused.
On the one hand
you indicated you could not trust him to keep it
confidential, and yet you say you thought he could keep
it confidential?
10
Correct.
11
Are you familiar with a -- Mr. or Officer
12
Herrick?
13
Yes.
14
And is he the head of the Explorer unit back
15
16
then?
A
He was back then not involved in the Explorer
17
post for either physical reasons or because he was
18
working at the airport.
19
20
Are you saying that he would not have had
access to that name?
Is that what you're saying?
21
He would have had access to the name.
22
Why didn't you try going through him?
23
Because I didn't want to do it at a low level
24
25
officer position.
Q
Instead, you would go to a lieutenant that you
Page: 544
felt was someone that could not keep a secret?
Yes.
Is that what you're suggesting?
Yes.
Isn't it true that you went to Flores because
you were trying to set him up?
No.
Isn't it true that you were jealous at that
point in time of the overtime that he was having as well
10
as the take-home car, and it would be a possibility of
11
having him removed from that position if he got in
12
trouble for leaking some confidential information?
13
No.
14
Isn't it true that if, in fact, he had been
15
transferred, that you, Come, or Ginter would be next in
16
line as lieutenants to take over that position of head
17
of motor?
18
No.
19
Now, I want to play from your tape concerning
20
your concerns about Flores, and I want to play -- it
21
will be in Volume I of the transcript, Page 128, Line
22
21, through 129, Line 14.
23
24
MR. GONZALES:
25
What exhibit is that?
Pardon me?
Is that an exhibit?
Page: 545
MR. GONZALES:
Yes, it will be next in order.
We'll make it -- this will be Volume One -- okay.
Exhibit 24.
MR. MILLER:
Just -- sorry.
Just for the
record, again, the City is now again attempting to use
transcripts that were requested to be provided, and
they're going to use the ones that they want to use for
their purposes, but having not provided them to the
hearing officer or ourselves.
10
record.
11
12
MR. GONZALES:
14
Yes.
So is it in their book as
well?
16
17
Well, where -- is this in
the book that I have?
13
15
Just noting it for the
MR. GONZALES:
do is play the tape.
Should be.
18
What we're going to
They have all the tapes.
Okay.
No, but I'm asking
19
is -- if it's marked as an exhibit and it's in my book,
20
is it also in the appellant's copy of the City's
21
exhibits, the transcript, that is?
22
MR. GONZALES:
23
MS. BERNAL:
24
25
That is correct.
This particular transcript is,
yes.
Okay.
So there again,
Page: 546
may we relieve the reporter of the responsibility of
transcribing the tape?
MR. MILLER:
MR. GONZALES:
No objection.
So stipulated.
All right.
So we'll go
off the record to hear the tape after we all have the
appropriate page of the exhibit in front of us.
8
9
So let me make sure I can get that set up

before you play it.
10
11
Okay.
I want to see it.
Everybody got it in front of them?
We're off the record.
12
(The audio recording was played.)
13
14
record.
15
Page 128 and 129, as described earlier, of Exhibit 24.
16
17
18
We've heard the portion of the tape that's at
Go ahead.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
Now, you've already indicated you went to
19
Flores.
20
believe also could have had the name.
21
original information, that came from a -- the reporting
22
party, the mother figure; correct?
23
24
25
You didn't attempt to talk to Herrick, who you

You knew that the
I'm sorry, that I had the name of the female,
the mother figure?

Q
Yeah.
I want to know that you knew that she
Page: 547
1
2
3
4
would have known the name; correct?

A
No, I didn't know that, that the mother
figure -Q
Are you saying that you didn't believe that the
person who first made contact with the officer who said
that there was possibly an improper relationship with
one of your officers didn't have the name of the person
he was having an illicit relationship with?
There was a problem that they were having on
10
the 26th of getting the name.
11
problem was.
12
I didn't know what that
How did you know that they were having a
13
problem if you had no contact with them from the 26th
14
until approximately a quarter to 5:00 on the 27th?
15
16
17
Because I was told in our meeting on the 26th
that they didn't have an exact name pinned down.

Q
Didn't they tell you they were going to go out
18
the next day and find out what that name was from the
19
reporting party?
20
21
I don't believe they did.

MR. GONZALES:
I want to play -- again, we'll
22
stipulate that it does not have to be transcribed.
23
stipulated?
24
MR. MILLER:
25
So
So stipulated.
What are we going to be

Page: 548
listening to before we go off the record?
MR. GONZALES:
We're going to be listening to
this same interview that's taking place with Mr. Ast and
the investigator, the investigation of the Covarrubias
case.
to 65, Line 10.
We're going to make reference to Page 62, Line 1,
MR. GONZALES:
10
That's Exhibit 24 again?
That is correct.
Okay.
We're off the
record.
11
12
13
record.
14
15
Counsel for Appellant wants to be heard on this

issue.
16
Go ahead.
17
MR. MILLER:
Just very briefly, and this is
18
more in the interest of time, I completely respect
19
opposing counsel's right to read from any transcripts,
20
in particular if they show some form of impeachment.
21
But this is the number two example of what I consider
22
not impeachment.
23
which you'll have in evidence.
24
review.
25
them some latitude, but I'm just trying to make a note
They're just going back to the IA file

You'll have all this to
And they can comment on -- I'm happy to give
Page: 549
for the record that as we go forward here today, if
we're going to read 15 or 25 clips of the record that
are not impeachment or not inconsistent with what he's
saying, at some point that's objectionable, and I'll
want a ruling.
Go ahead.
So we're off the record.
10
11
record.
12
BY MR. GONZALES:
13
All right.
Well, noted.
Go ahead.
You indicated that you didn't know that there
14
were some dynamics going on, and you didn't understand
15
why they couldn't get the name.
16
saying?
Is that what you're
17
Right.
18
Why didn't you ask what those dynamics were as
19
to why they couldn't get the name?
20
Why didn't I ask Paul?
21
Yes.
22
I just figured there had to be a reason.
23
Paul's a sharp guy.
24
having problems getting the name, there had to be a
25
reason, but he would be working on it.
He's a good detective.
And if he's
Page: 550
You're a sharp guy too.
Why didn't you say,
"What's the problem?
Maybe I can give you a suggestion"?
Maybe I can give you a hand.
I just didn't do it.
Do you believe that was a failure in your
leadership?
No.
I want to play now Page 82 Line 2, through 89
Line 19.
10
All right.
Let's go off
11
the record to hear that portion of the recorded
12
interview.
13
14
15
record.
16
BY MR. GONZALES:
17
18
Mr. Ast, on the 26th, the person that first
told Van Meel was Officer Huffman; correct?
19
Yes.
20
And Officer Huffman got it from the reporting
21
party who is a mother figure who lived up in San Luis
22
Obispo; also correct?
23
24
25
I didn't know about the place where she lived,
but correct.
Q
Okay.
And you knew she was a mother figure?
Page: 551
Yes.
And the mother figure would know the name of
the girl that she's concerned about; correct?
MR. MILLER:
THE WITNESS:
8
9
Calls for speculation.

Overruled.
You would think so.

Okay.
Let's go off the
record to hear the recording, or are you done with that?

MR. GONZALES:
I am done, but the girl's name
10
is in the body of this particular portion, so we'll need
11
to excuse everybody for the next minute or two.
12
Oh, all right.
So we'll
13
go off the record, and I will ask those who are in
14
attendance in the audience, including the press, to
15
leave during this portion of the hearing.
16
(Whereupon, the general public exited the
17
hearing room.)
18
19
20
MS. BERNAL:
22
MR. GONZALES:
23
MS. BERNAL:
25
Let's go back
on the record.
21
24
All right.
Does this need to still be -I'm sorry?

-- private or can it be back to
public hearing?
MR. GONZALES:
That's the only time I've ever

Page: 552
seen her name mentioned throughout the transcript.
All right.
So let's go
off the record again to bring the public back into the
room, and maybe this is the time for a five-minute
break.
(Recess taken.)
(The general public entered the hearing room.)
after our mid-morning break.
10
11
12
We're back on the record
Go ahead, please.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
One of the questions that was posed to you by
13
the investigator was, "So that morning, Paul goes and
14
talks to the reporting party."
15
that and seeing it up in the transcript?
Do you remember hearing
16
Something about that, yes.
17
I'm sorry?
18
Something about that, yes.
19
Well, that is specifically what it said.
20
wasn't something about it.
21
82, Lines 13 and 14.
22
23
24
25
It
It says exactly that at Page
"So that morning, Paul goes and talks to this

reporting party."
Now, why didn't you call Paul Van Meel and say,
hey, before I go to see Flores -- because we know that
Page: 553
that guy always has loose lips.
all at the same time said he can't keep anything
confidential -- why didn't you at least try first to get
ahold of Paul and see whether he got the name?
We don't trust him.
No, I'm listening.
Oh.
-- at the same time.
Okay.
Do you understand my question?
Yeah.
Paul never got back to me.
10
I'm reading it --
He never
I heard you say that before, and I appreciate
12
that.
13
someone you didn't trust?
14
Why didn't you call him before you went to
I don't know.
I just -- he never called me, so
I didn't figure that he had any information.
16
17
Mr. Ast?
called me.
11
15
Q
him.
He didn't call you, so you didn't try to call

Is that your answer?
18
Yes.
19
Is that in your opinion good leadership
20
We
qualities?
21
I thought it was appropriate for this case.
22
You thought it was appropriate to go to someone
23
that you earlier had said you don't trust, he can't keep
24
a secret, he can't keep any confidentiality, and you
25
didn't think to at least try to get ahold of Paul Van
Page: 554
Meel in case he might have gotten the girl's name?
Well, I figured I could get it from Lieutenant
Flores; if I told him to keep it a secret, that he would
keep it a secret and at least respect our positions.
And in the body of this, you also indicated,
"Who is the RP?"
the terminology "RP" stood for?
Didn't you know who the RP was or what
I know what RP stands for.
Why did you ask who -- "What do you mean by the
10
RP?"
Let me find that.
11
I don't know what page number you're on.
12
I'll find it in a minute.
13
Okay.
So we're at the point in time now where
14
you've gotten the girl's name from the -- from Flores by
15
way of getting the list.
16
thereafter, you get approached by Commander Green; is
17
that correct?
And at some point in time soon
18
Correct.
19
And what does Commander Green tell you?
20
He --
21
Or ask you?
22
He came into my office and he asked, "What's
23
going on with your request for the Explorer roster?
24
are you making that request?"
25
Why
And about how much time would you estimate it
Page: 555
was from the time that you had made contact with Flores
to request the roster?
It was pretty quick, 5 to 10 minutes.
Okay.
Good.
So 10 minutes later, he comes in
your office and he asks you what, specifically?
Just what I said.
And what did you respond?
I was upset.
with this guy.
I said, "See, that's the problem
He can't even keep a secret, even when
10
he was told to."
11
Lieutenant Flores to him.
12
sir, but there's already a commander that's in on this
13
investigation, in the loop, and it's one of those things
14
where the less people who know it, the better off it is,
15
so I'm not even going to tell you the name of the
16
person.
17
said that he would, that there was no need for him to
18
know anything else.
19
And I said -- and I vented about

And I said, "No disrespect,
And I would ask that you respect that."
And he
So the very thing that you were concerned about
20
by telling Flores occurred.
21
first guy he leaked it to was Green, Commander Green?
He leaked it to -- the
22
Correct.
23
Now, when you had given this interview to the
24
investigator back in September 20th, 2012, you were
25
telling the truth; is that right?
Page: 556
Yes.
And of course you were not placed under oath at
that time, were you, or do you recall?
I don't believe we were placed under oath.
You weren't.
But you have been placed under
oath in this proceeding?
Correct.
You know that, obviously.
Yes.
10
And you know that Van Meel claims that he told
11
you about going out to see the reporting party before he
12
came in and talked to you at 4:30, 5 o'clock on the
13
27th, that Friday.
14
15
16
You know that, don't you?
MR. MILLER:
Misstates all the facts.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
My question is very specific and doesn't
17
misstate anything.
18
Van Meel claims he told you before 4:30, 5 o'clock on
19
the 27th, that's Friday, that he had told you earlier he
20
was going to go see the RP, the reporting party?
21
22
My question to you is, you know that

objection.
23
Go ahead.
24
THE WITNESS:
25
Overruled on the
I don't remember when he went and
saw the RP.
Page: 557
1
2
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
You know that Van Meel claims he told you
before he met you that late afternoon, early evening,
that he told you earlier that he was going to go out and
see that RP, between sometime earlier in the day, 10:00,
12 o'clock, thereabouts?
No, I don't remember that.
Okay.
9
10
So the very concern that you had about
telling Flores had occurred when he goes and tells

Green, and you're upset about it, aren't you?
11
Yes.
12
And then when you talked to Van Meel, what you
13
do remember is about 4:30, quarter to 5 o'clock, you're
14
talking to Van Meel, and he tells you about the same
15
time that you talk to Flores, "I got the name also,"
16
words to that effect?
17
Yes.
18
Fair statement?
19
Correct.
20
Is Van Meel upset about the fact that you went
21
to Flores?
22
I don't think I told him at that time.
23
I'm sorry, sir?
24
I don't think I told him at that time.
25
Well, when you -- well, you told him that you
Page: 558
got the girl's name; right?
about the same time"?
And then he said, "I got it
Oh, yes, you're right.
I thought I was.
You're correct.
Okay.
So my question to you now is, was he upset that
you went to Flores, the very guy that you all agreed
that you weren't to go to?
I don't know if he was upset or not.
He didn't say anything to you, "Well, jeepers,
10
Lieutenant, why did you go to Flores?
11
could have gone to somebody else before you went to
12
him"?
13
My gosh, you
He said words to the effect of just at the same
14
time you were getting the information about that, I was
15
probably getting the information on the cold call.
16
17
4, to Page 143, Line 12.
18
19
22
All right.
Let's go off
the record to hear the recording.
20
21
I want to play again Exhibit 24, Page 142, Line

BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
You indicate in here this is a classic example
23
of why he shouldn't be in the position, referring to
24
Flores; correct?
25
Yes.
Page: 559
Classic example.
When you knew it was going to
be a classic example of him leaking, why did you go to
Flores and didn't try to call Van Meel, didn't try to
call Herrick (sic)?
Because I figured I would put bygones or the
past behind me and that I would just let him, being a
lieutenant, in the loop, and that I could trust him; if
I told him things were going to be confidential, that he
could be a big enough person to keep it confidential.
10
You had an ongoing feud with this man since at
11
least November of 2011.
12
that.
13
this date did you want to let bygones be bygones?
14
15
16
You've already testified to
You had a bad relationship with this guy.
Why on
Because I figured that was the professional
thing to do, and he was a lieutenant.

Q
On this kind of an investigation involving
17
another officer that might have been involved with a
18
minor, you thought that day you're going to trust him
19
with this information.
20
believe?
Is that what you want us to
21
22
MR. MILLER:
23
24
25
Excuse me.
Vague and ambiguous with respect
to "this information."
Yeah, I'm not sure that's
been established exactly what information Lieutenant
Page: 560
Flores was given, so that's --
BY MR. GONZALES:
What did you tell Flores that he leaked?
When did I tell him?
No, sir.
6
7
Flores?
A
What was it?
What did you tell
What did you say to get the name?

That I needed the list of the Explores who were
working the post that night, that were working the DUI
checkpoint that night.
10
And what did he say to you?
11
He wanted to know why I wanted the list.
12
What did you say to him?
13
That I couldn't tell him that information, but
14
I needed the list.
15
What did he say to you?
16
He still wanted to know why I wanted the list.
17
What did you say to him?
18
I said, "I can't tell you."
I said, "If I
19
could or if I need to, you'll be the first person that I
20
come to to tell, but I need you to trust me on this.
21
There's a reason why I need the list, so could you
22
please get me the list?"
23
What did he say, if anything?
24
He said okay.
25
What happens after that?
Page: 561
1
2
3
after he left.
Q
4
5
Commander Green comes walking into my office
We've already discussed what happened there.

And then after that, what happens as far as
getting the list?
Yeah, eventually he brings me the list.
Do you say anything to him as to how upset you
were that he would have breached this confidentiality
that you had just entrusted him with because you were
10
going to try to trust him for the first time --
11
No.
12
-- in a few months?
13
Okay.
Let's go back to this conversation that
14
you had with Green that we just played.
15
"He shouldn't be in this position," and you go on, "He
16
shouldn't be a lieutenant," do you mean that he should
17
not have been in motor?
18
When you said,
No, I meant that he shouldn't be a lieutenant.
19
He shouldn't be in the position that he's in and the
20
rank that he's in.
21
And if he shouldn't have been a lieutenant, he
22
couldn't have been the head of motor, could he?
23
a lieutenant's position?
24
25
That's
Well, it just -- it didn't used to always be
like that.
We used to have sergeants running it.
Page: 562
At this point in
time, it was a lieutenant's position to be head of
motor; accurate?
Yes.
If he was removed from motor, as you thought he
should have been, then that means another lieutenant
would have taken that place; accurate?
8
9
10
11
If that's the way they wanted to fill it, it
could have happened that way.

Q
Well, assuming that he wanted -- well,
withdrawn.
12
He wanted a lieutenant in that position.
13
That's why he had one there by the name of Flores;
14
right?
15
Well, he wanted a lieutenant in the position,
16
but the reality of it is he didn't need a lieutenant in
17
that position.
18
19
Sir, if he was removed, if Flores was removed,
that opened that position up to somebody else; right?
20
Maybe, maybe not.
21
And that maybe could have been you; right?
22
No, I wouldn't take the position.
23
You wouldn't have taken that position even
24
though earlier you testified that you were very
25
concerned about not getting the overtime that position
Page: 563
had an access to?
MR. MILLER:
Misstates the testimony.

Yeah, I -- sustained.
I think he said he was concerned about the car, not
getting the car.
car.
BY MR. GONZALES:
It wasn't the overtime.
It was the
That's what the testimony was.
Were you ever concerned about getting overtime?
Not in that position, no.
10
You never were?
11
12
13
You didn't care about overtime at all then, did

you?
A
Well, I got enough overtime in the position I
14
was in.
15
would have been great, but it wasn't high on my list of
16
things to do.
17
If I got some overtime in that position, that
Didn't you, on two to three different
18
occasions, say why was Flores able to hoard all the
19
money for the overtime?
20
I don't remember that.
21
Let's see if this refreshes your recollection.
22
I'm going to make reference to the Topham investigation.
23
MR. MILLER:
24
MR. GONZALES:
25
I want to make an objection.

I'm going to make reference to
Page 30, which specifically says what I just indicated.
Page: 564
THE WITNESS:
Where are you at?

Are we back to the same
issue that we were going to -- so perhaps this is a good
time to revisit the whole issue of the Motion to Compel.
MR. GONZALES:
If we can, I want to get as much
as I can out of this witness before we get into the side
issues, and I can do this at any point in time.
8
9
10
aside any references to that investigation until we iron

out that issue.
11
12
13
14
Well, then let's put
MR. MILLER:
Thank you.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
Are you suggesting that at no point in time did
you ever say you did not want overtime?
15
No.
16
What are you saying, then, in regards to the
17
18
overtime issue?
A
That it wasn't that important to me to get it.
19
In my position that I was in, I was getting overtime
20
anyway.
21
in as a lieutenant.
22
family was not dependent upon me bringing home a lot of
23
overtime.
24
25
I was making enough money in the position I was

I was living within my means.
My
We're going to move on to later that night.
Between the approximate 5 o'clock conversation that you
Page: 565
last had with Green, was there anything else that was
involving this investigation, up until around midnight
of the 27th and the early morning hours of the 28th?
4
5
station at some point.
6
7
8
9
10
11
Yes, I believe Paul Van Meel came back to the
About what time would you estimate that to have
been?
A
That he came back around 9 o'clock or so for
something.
Q
We had a conversation.
That's your best recollection, that he came
back to you -- to the station at about 9:00 p.m.?
12
Yes.
13
Okay.
14
I don't remember.
Was he alone or with anyone?

And quite frankly, I don't
15
remember if it was him or Terry Flaa that came back to
16
the station.
17
You don't remember --
18
I don't remember if it was him or Terry Flaa
19
that came back to the station.
20
either one of them.
It could have been
21
And whichever one it was, what did they say?
22
Well, then it would have been later.
They said
23
that they spoke with the victim, that they -- so this
24
must have been after 9 o'clock then.
25
It was about 12:00 -- well, the end of that
Page: 566
day, the early morning hours of the 28th; correct?
Okay.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth --
That sounds more like it --
If that's your recollection --
Yeah.
(Interruption by the reporter.)
THE WITNESS:
was later.
BY MR. GONZALES:
10
11
Yes, that's my recollection.
It must have been later.
So around midnight, now, of the end of the
27th, Paul or Flaa comes back to you?
12
Yes.
13
What did they say to you?
14
15
It
Whichever one it
was, what did they say?

A
They said that they picked up the girl or had
16
the mother pick up the girl, bring her back to the
17
house, that it was a difficult interview at first.
18
the first hour she was not forthcoming, but then for
19
about the next two hours, she indicated that she had
20
been victimized on several occasions, sexually; that she
21
had been involved in intercourse in Covarrubias's
22
vehicle; that she had been involved in intercourse in a
23
hotel or hotels; that she had full sexual intercourse
24
and oral intercourse, and that's pretty much the gist of
25
the conversation.
For
Page: 567
Okay.
Thank you, sir.
Now, up to that approximate midnight of the
27th and the early morning hours of the 28th, when was
the last time you had previously talked to Commander
Ritz?
I don't remember.
Well, can you give me an estimate?
No.
Was it on the -- at any time during the 27th,
10
the day of the 27th, that Friday?
11
I'm not sure.
12
As a matter of fact, the last time you talked
13
to Commander Ritz was the day before, the 26th.
14
that refresh your recollection?
Does
15
It doesn't refresh my recollection.
16
If in fact, as you allege, Commander Ritz was
17
heading this investigation, why was it you did not
18
contact him for the entire day of the 27th?
19
20
21
22
I don't know that I did not -- that I didn't
contact him.
Q
Well, he'll be coming in and testifying that
you did not --
23
Okay.
24
-- until approximately 12:30 a.m. on the 28th,
25
after you had received the information you just
Page: 568
indicated.
And my question is, would it not be your
responsibility to talk to the head of that investigation
during that time period with any new information that
you had received if in fact, of course, he was the lead
in that investigation?
Well, I talked to him right after I had the
conversation with Paul Van Meel and got that information
'cause it was the first time anybody brought me more
10
11
information.
Q
Well, that's not quite accurate, is it, sir,
12
'cause we know that on the 27th, about 5:00 p.m., you
13
talked to Van Meel and you got the girl's name at the
14
same time that you allege Van Meel got the name.
15
wasn't the first time you got the information that you
16
did, at midnight.
So it
It was about five hours earlier.
17
Right.
18
So my question to you is, why didn't you get a
19
ahold of the leader of that investigation when you got
20
that information at 5:00 p.m.?
21
22
Because that wasn't a huge deal, to finally get
the name of the girl, so --
23
Well -- excuse me.
24
What was more important was the fact that now
25
they had the name of the girl, and now they got a good
Page: 569
interview, and now they had probable cause to arrest,
and that was a -- a major thing with the investigation,
a major part of the investigation.
that was the appropriate time to give him a call at his
house.
So it seemed like
In your previous testimony you indicated how
difficult it was and how rough it was.
what the problems were, but it was difficult getting
that girl's name, which is essential in conducting this
10
investigation.
You don't know
Do you remember that testimony?
11
Yes.
12
And now that you finally got it around
13
5:00 p.m., about the same time that Van Meel got it,
14
according to your testimony, wouldn't that be an
15
important piece of paper, an important piece of evidence
16
to tell the leader of that investigation that you -- we
17
got it.
18
leader of this investigation?
We got the girl's name, Commander Ritz, the
19
20
do with it?
21
we used it and got somewhere with it.
22
No, because then it was -- then what would they

It would be important if we had some -- if
So that's why.
Well, being the leader of the investigation, as
23
you claimed that Commander Ritz was, wouldn't it be
24
important to then say, "Commander Ritz, we've got the
25
girl's name.
What should we do next?"
He's leading the

Page: 570
1
2
pack, not you.

A
Well, the two sergeants were in charge of the
investigation when they were working on it, so they
seemed to be doing well at that point, so I just let
them run with the investigation.
6
7
Okay.
So now it's not Ritz who's running the
investigation, but the two sergeants?
MR. MILLER:
Misstates the testimony.
THE WITNESS:
They were working the
10
investigation.
11
BY MR. GONZALES:
12
I think I used those words.
What are you doing in all this mix?
13
your function then?
14
the investigation.
15
are conducting the investigation.
What is
We have Ritz being the leader of

You've got the two sergeants that
What's your job?
16
I'm the nighttime watch commander.
17
And that's all you had to do with this?
18
That's not all it was.
I was the nighttime
19
watch commander responsible for law enforcement within
20
the entire city.
21
So you weren't involved in this investigation
22
at all; you just happened to be the watch commander that
23
night and that early evening?
24
testifying to?
25
Is that what you're
I was there as a sounding board for the
Page: 571
detectives that were working.
off of me because I used to be their boss.
3
4
They were bouncing things
And you talking about Van Meel and Flaa and
Ruiz?
Yes.
And they are just bouncing stuff off of you as
a buddy, not as a -- involved in the investigation?
that what you're telling the hearing officer?
9
10
11
12
Is
No, they're bouncing things off of me because
they respect my opinion, I would imagine.

Q
Well, wasn't it your decision to initially say,
"Ruiz, go out there and make the arrest"?
13
No.
14
Okay.
Wasn't it your decision to say to the
15
two sergeants, "Hey, you two guys, go out there and make
16
the arrest"?
17
No.
18
That's all Ritz?
19
It's Ritz deciding that we needed to go make
20
21
the arrest, yes.

Q
So to make sure that this record is clear, your
22
testimony is that you were not involved in the
23
investigation other than as a sounding board and that
24
you were functioning solely as the watch commander; is
25
that accurate?
Page: 572
Yes.
Thank you.
Now, when you call Commander Ritz at
approximately 12:36 a.m. on the 28th, what do you tell
him?
I repeated to him what I learned through the
detectives and told him that he needed to come down to
the station because things were heating up in the
investigation, and that he was either going to need,
10
meaning Covarrubias, either need to be arrested or to be
11
put on administrative leave, and he needed to be there
12
for that.
13
asked him to come meet with me.
14
That needs to be his decision to make.
And I
Thank you.
15
Now, as just a sounding board, why didn't you
16
have Van Meel or Flaa or Ruiz, who was involved in the
17
investigation 'cause you were not, call Commander Ritz?
18
Why did they have you do it, or why did you do it when
19
you were not involved in the investigation?
20
Because it was getting to a thing with an
21
employee to where he was either going to have to be
22
arrested or put on administrative leave, and that's
23
something that's done at the higher level.
24
usually done by a commander or the chief of police.
25
My question, sir, is very specific.
That's
It is why
Page: 573
did you make the call?
the investigation.
involved in the investigation, or the three -- Flaa,
Van Meel, and Ruiz -- why didn't they call Ritz?
5
6
7
Because you're not involved in
Why didn't the two fellows that were
I figure it was more of a managerial decision
to be making.
Q
Why is calling the head of the investigation a
managerial decision as opposed to the investigators that
are involved in the investigation?
Please enlighten me.
10
I didn't understand that question.
11
I'm sorry?
12
I didn't understand that question.
13
Why is it managerial, as you just testified to,
14
for the phone call to come from you instead of the two
15
investigators that were involved in the investigation,
16
to call Ritz?
17
Because I'm a manager, but, I mean, they could
18
have called him if they wanted to.
19
bothered me if they did.
20
he got down to the station as quick as possible.
21
was there by a phone.
22
It wouldn't have
But I wanted to make sure that

So I
I just called him.
Well, sir, if you're not involved in the
23
investigation, the people that would be involved are the
24
two investigators, Flaa and Van Meel, and then their
25
assistant, if you will, with Officer Ruiz.
And they
Page: 574
would have more of the information than you would
because they're directly involved in the investigation.
So if the -- if there was an obligation to talk to the
leader of the investigation, Ritz, as you claim that he
is, then they would be more appropriate ones to make the
call 'cause they've got more information than you would
have had; correct?
8
9
10
11
Yeah, but they were driving back out to the
house, too, so they were still working on the

investigation.
Q
Well, before they left the station to go out to
12
the house again, they could have made that call,
13
couldn't they have?
14
Sure, they could have.
15
And as you, just being the sounding board, you
16
could have said, "Look, I know just a little bit about
17
this investigation.
18
make sure that the head of the investigation has all the
19
right details.
20
and get ahold of Ritz."
I'm not involved.
And I want to
So before you two guys leave, be sure

Did you ever say that?
21
No.
22
Is there some reason why you didn't?
23
I didn't feel it was necessary.
24
25
I didn't see a
problem with me calling my commander, my boss.

Q
Now, we're at the point in time where Ritz is
Page: 575
at the station.
2
3
Now -- withdrawn.
This information that you gave to Ritz, that

was via telephone; right?
Yes.
Then he leaves and comes to the station?
Correct.
Okay.
8
9
And when he gets to the station, tell me
what occurs then.

A
I brief him on everything that I knew up to
10
that point.
11
Ruiz was there with us.
12
far as everything that happened on the phone call that I
13
received.
We were in the detective bureau.
Alfredo
I was giving him the scoop as
And that's when Alfredo Ruiz's phone rang.
14
I'm sorry?
15
That's when Alfredo Ruiz's phone rang.
16
Okay.
17
Cell phone.
18
Right.
And that was the call from Van Meel,
19
from the house where the Ruiz -- where the cold call was
20
taking place?
21
Correct.
22
Before we get there, if all you were was the
23
sounding board, why were you briefing Ritz instead of
24
Ruiz, who was there?
25
investigation, and you weren't.
He was involved in the
Page: 576
1
2
3
A
it.
'Cause I was the one who was just talking about
I mean, no reason in particular.

Q
Well, you weren't involved in the
investigation, so therefore, you would not have had all
the pertinent information that Ruiz would have had.
didn't Ruiz make that contact with Ritz and give him all
the information?
You're not involved?
He had more of it than you did.
I'm not sure if he had more than I did.
10
think he was sent home for a period of time and then
11
came back.
12
Why
So now we have a telephone call that takes
13
place that is the cold call between the victim, the Jane
14
Doe, and Covarrubias, who is out there at the DUI
15
checkpoint.
16
Yes.
17
And this information is being relayed from the
Am I accurate?
18
female to Flaa, to Van Meel, who then has called Ruiz on
19
the other line at the station.
Am I accurate so far?
20
I believe so, yes.
21
And then Ruiz is then relating information to
22
you; correct?
23
To Ritz and myself.
24
Where is Ritz in relation to everybody in the
25
room or wherever?
Page: 577
to me.
He's in the office with us, standing right next
Now, you're watch commander that night, so
there's a lot of other things going on, isn't there?
Yes.
I mean this is a station that's busy, it's
1 o'clock in the morning, it's a Friday night, early
Saturday morning.
accurate?
10
11
12
A lot of things are happening.
The station was empty.
It wasn't busy.
Am I
The
streets were busy.

Q
Okay.
But you're not involved in this
13
investigation.
14
there getting all this information, and why not just
15
directly going to Ritz?
16
You're a watch commander.
You're a sounding board.
Why are you in
'Cause you have other duties.
17
Right.
18
My question is, why are you involved in this
19
relaying of information in an investigation you're not a
20
part of?
21
22
23
Because he wanted the information, and I gave
it to him.
Q
So the phone call came in to Ruiz.
Why
24
couldn't Ruiz just give the information to Ritz and keep
25
you out of the loop because you're not involved?
Page: 578
1
2
He could have, but we were all standing in
there in the same proximity of each other.
Gotcha.
All right.
After this information is relayed, you also
find out that Covarrubias says, "I'm not going to be
taken to jail.
I'm going to kill myself first."
Right?
Yes.
He also says that, "I'm going to kill myself if
9
10
they come to arrest me," words to that effect.

Accurate?
11
No, I didn't get that information.
12
You didn't get that information?
13
No.
14
You didn't know it was conditional?
15
No.
16
So therefore, he was going to kill himself
17
right then and there, so you're just waiting to hear a
18
pop over the phone?
19
No.
20
Then why was it not conditional?
21
have something happen before that occurrence occurs.
22
23
24
25
It had to
That's the way the information was relayed to
And were there any questions asked?
me.
"Hey,
Ruiz, ask the question of under what circumstances he's
Page: 579
going to kill himself"?
No.
Did Ritz ever ask that question?
No, he did not.
Okay.
So at no point in time up until the
shooting did you know that it was conditional, based
upon him being arrested?
8
9
I knew that he said he's not going to go to
jail, or he's not going to go to prison, and he going to
10
kill himself.
11
that.
12
Is that an accurate statement?
He would rather kill himself than do
Now, being a law enforcement officer and a
13
smart man, you know that before you go to jail or you go
14
to a prison, it's a long process, isn't it?
15
got to get arrested.
16
against you.
17
there's all this time element in between that and going
18
to jail and prison.
First you
Then you got to have a filing
Then there's got to be a conviction.
So
Accurate?
19
Yes.
20
So all this time in between, theoretically, if
21
that's all he says, "I'm not going to go to jail or
22
prison," he would still be alive and not shoot himself
23
or kill himself?
Correct?
24
No, I didn't believe that to be the case.
25
Gotcha.
Page: 580
1
2
3
So what do you do when you hear this

information, that he's going kill himself?
A
I listen to Commander Ritz.
We're going to put
together a group and go out there and get him.
to get a team together.
6
7
Let's go out and get him.
We need
How do you go out
and get him?
Put a team together.
We talked a little bit about that at the
10
beginning of our conversation together.
11
say, "Let's go get him," to?
12
13
14
15
16
Like who's the team?
And who do you
Is that what you're
asking?
Q
Yeah, I want to know what you say in regards
to, "Let's go get him."

A
I said, okay.
17
really in the station.
18
out on calls.
19
Nartatez.
We don't have any resources

We're shorthanded.
Everybody's
The only person in the station is Chris
And I said I'd go talk to Chris.
20
Chris Nartatez?
21
Yes.
22
Now, before you talk to Nartatez, though, there
23
had been a command, if you will, that Ruiz should go out
24
and make the arrest.
25
Isn't that true?
That's possible.
Page: 581
You don't have an independent recollection of
whether or not Ruiz was told to go out and make the
arrest first?
No, I don't.
And why is it you're still involved in this?
You're a watch commander.
show.
I mean, Ritz is running the
Because we're so shorthanded.
You're shorthanded.
Therefore, if shorthanded,
10
wouldn't Ritz be the one that would make the direction
11
as to who needs to go someplace and make the arrest, and
12
you do your duties as a watch commander?
13
shorthanded, you need to take care of business at your
14
-- your obligation?
15
16
17
18
Well, in a perfect world, but we were very
shorthanded.
Q
Because you're
There was nobody in the station.
Well, we know that Nartatez was there.
We know
that Ritz was there.
19
Right.
20
We know that Ruiz was there.
21
Right.
22
We know that you were there.
23
Right.
24
And you were the watch commander that has other
25
duties.
You're not involved in this investigation.
Page: 582
Right.
So I'm wondering, sir, and my question directly
to you is, if you're shorthanded, why didn't you do your
duties, and the other four fellows that were involved in
the investigation make a decision as to how this arrest
was going to take place?
7
8
Because Craig wanted me to put together a team
of guys.
Who did?
10
Commander Ritz.
11
Craig Ritz?
12
Craig Ritz.
13
Right.
14
together"?
I'm sorry.
And he said, "I want you to put a team
Is that what you're telling us?
15
Yes.
16
And you say, "Yes, sir"?
17
Yes.
18
And does he say who's going to take over the
19
watch commander position?
20
No.
21
Because now it's going to be vacant.
If you're
22
going to be gone or you're going to be involved in this
23
arrest, then that leaves a big hole there for that
24
night; right?
25
And an empty station, yes.
Page: 583
And an empty station, absolutely.

So, what you end up doing, then, is doing what?
Craig tells your -- Commander Ritz tells you to put a
team together?
I may have had a call initially with Alfredo
Ruiz because I remember him leaving to go change or
something or to get some gear.
office where Chris Nartatez was, and I informed him of
what was going on and that I needed him to participate
I went to the sergeant's
10
in an arrest.
11
learned that he was cousins with Albert Covarrubias.
12
And then that's when he -- that's when I
Okay.
Let's go back a moment.
You indicated
13
that you know that Ruiz was involved.
14
go get the gear.
15
there was an indication that he should have made the
16
arrest?
17
Yes.
18
Okay.
He was going to
Do you have a recollection now that
So that refreshes your recollection to
19
some extent that he was involved in the potential
20
arresting of Covarrubias; right?
21
Yes, he was.
22
And at first, when you mentioned to Ruiz to go
23
out there and make the arrest or whatever the words were
24
that you used, did he give you any objections?
25
He said that he shouldn't be in the first
Page: 584
contact team --
Okay.
-- because he's not usually working those hours
and that that would be -- could be a tip-off --
Anything else?
-- if he pulls up in a car.
Did he tell you anything else, any other
concerns?
Maybe, but not that I'm remembering.
10
You do not remember any other concerns that
11
Ruiz told you; is that what you're telling us?
12
That's true.
13
Did he say something to the effect of this is a
14
bad idea, red flags?
15
No.
16
Let me go through each individual one.
17
Did he ever tell you, "This a bad idea"?
18
Not that I remember.
19
Did he ever tell you, "Why are we rushing
20
this?"
21
No, not that I remember.
22
Did he ever tell you, "We go out there and
23
there's nine other guys that don't know who's -- what's
24
going on, there's going to be confusion"?
25
No.
Page: 585
Did he ever tell you that if there's a struggle
of some kind, the officers out there are not going to
know who the good guys or bad guys are?
No.
Did he ever tell you, "What happens if he pulls
a gun on me or someone?"
No.
Isn't it true that at that point in time, you
9
10
said, "Just kill him"?

A
If I said that, then it would have been
11
something that was -- because he was asking a question
12
like that, "What do I do if he pulls a gun on me?"
13
I would likely have said something like that.
14
15
16
17
18
19
Then
Isn't it true you said that twice, "Just kill
him, just kill him"?

A
No, I don't know if I said it once, twice, if I
said it at all.
Q
Now, this a guy that you're trying to save from
killing himself.
That's what the rush is; right?
20
Yes.
21
And then at the same token, you say, "Just kill
22
the guy if he pulls a gun on you"?
23
I don't remember saying that.
24
Well, as a matter of fact in your testimony,
25
you denied saying that.
We're going to play that in

Page: 586
just a minute.
Now, what's Ritz doing all this time?
He's in on the phone in the report-writing
room.
office.
in and was there and was present, and I informed him
that Officer Nartatez is his cousin and perhaps he
shouldn't go.
I will be going.
10
calming effect."
I remember seeing him there.
He was in the
When I was talking with Chris Nartatez, he came
And that's when Chris Nartatez said, "No,

He's my cousin.
Maybe that will be a
11
12
there?
13
Yes.
14
He doesn't give you any concerns as to red
15
flags?
16
No, not that I remember.
17
Nartatez doesn't say, "What's the rush?"
18
Not that I recall, no.
19
He doesn't say something to the effect of,
So Nartatez basically volunteers to go out
20
"He's armed.
21
This is dangerous," words to that effect?
He's got a gun.
He's maybe suicidal.
22
Well, I told him that he may be suicidal.
23
I understand that.
24
I'm the one that told him that he went
25
suicidal.
Page: 587
My question to you, sir, is did Nartatez give
you his concern that he's going out to face a man with a
gun who may be suicidal?
Not that I recall.
Now, those kind of things are something that's
fairly important, listening to another officer giving
you, or a supervisor, their concerns about a certain
command or decisions; fair statement?
Yes.
10
And it's something that you would normally
11
remember.
12
a bunch of problems here, Lieutenant.
13
about this a little bit more," something like that,
14
you'd remember, wouldn't you?
If a subordinate says, "Hey, listen, there's

We've got to talk
15
Yes.
16
And you have no recall of any of that, do you?
17
No.
18
How about Norling?
19
Norling eventually gets
involved in this, doesn't he?
20
Yes.
21
Matter of fact, you make a decision, let's send
22
the sergeants.
23
we got one out there in the field, Norling.
24
statement?
25
We got one already here, Nartatez, and

Fair
Yes.
Page: 588
1
2
So you call him into the station.
He shows up
a few minutes later?
Correct.
And then you tell him basically the same thing;
let's go out there, make the arrest, he's suicidal,
potentially so.
going to jail or prison?
8
9
10
11
12
Do you tell him it's conditional, upon
I think I said he just -- "We've got him on a
cold call.
He just went suicidal and hung up the
phone."
Q
Narling.
Now, do you tell Narling -- I'm sorry, not

It's Norling, isn't it?
13
Norling.
14
Norling.
15
Do you tell him that we have to go right now?
16
Yes.
17
And you had already said that to Nartatez as
18
well; correct?
19
Correct.
20
Okay.
21
Because the DUI checkpoint was shutting down.
22
23
24
25
Why did you have to go right now?
It was closing.
Q
That would have meant that Flores would have
left the area as well; right?

A
Yes.
Page: 589
Flores, in other words, he's part of the unit?
Yes.
And he would have left if everybody just
dispersed?
Right.
Why didn't you wait until Nartatez -- or
Covarrubias either came back to the station or was
followed to wherever he might have gone and made the
arrest at some other location?
10
Because he was said to have just gone suicidal
11
and so he could have got on his bike and killed himself.
12
He could have shot himself in the head right there at
13
the scene.
14
killed himself or -- killed his wife or killed his kids.
15
I mean, who knows what he could have done?
He could have -- he could have gone home and
16
He could have done a hundred different things.
17
Yes.
18
But he didn't say he was going to kill anybody
19
else; he just said he was going to kill himself?
20
Yes.
21
Going back to the conversation, the cold call
22
while you were listening in or listening to Ruiz give
23
all the information that he had received, wasn't there
24
an indication that Covarrubias said that "I'm going to
25
stand by you"?
Page: 590
1
2
She claimed that she was pregnant.

part of the ruse.
That was
You understood that; right?
I never heard any part of that.
Was that related to you?
No.
All right.
So now we're at the point in time
that we're going out to -- you're making a direction to
have the two sergeants make contact; right?
Yes.
10
And you have no independent recollection of any
11
of the three -- Ruiz, Norling, Nartatez -- raising a
12
number of concerns?
You have no memory of that the all?
13
No.
14
That's a correct statement, what I just said;
15
is that right?
16
Correct.
17
Okay.
18
19
Do you remember when you -- withdrawn.
What was your plan?
What did you tell them to
do?
20
The first two sergeants, Norling and Nartatez,
21
were going to be a block, block-and-a-half in front of
22
me.
23
identify Covarrubias, and through the element of
24
surprise, get close to him.
25
going to be there, too, so if they had to go hands-on
They were going to drive up, try to locate and
And Richard Flores was
Page: 591
with him, then he was going to be there to go hands-on
as well, so there would be three people initially.
Myself and Alfredo Ruiz were following behind from a
distance, and we were going to wait until they
established contact, and then we were going to run up
there and help them in case they needed additional
bodies.
8
9
Okay.
So you're a part of a five-man team if I
understand this correctly.
10
Correct.
11
And you conveyed that to everybody about this
12
five-man team, arrest team?
13
No.
14
Why didn't you tell everybody else there's five
15
16
17
guys involved?
A
Well, I thought I told Nartatez about it.
didn't tell Norling about it.
18
Why not?
19
I forgot.
20
Is that good leadership?
21
To forget?
22
To forget to tell somebody who's going to make
23
an arrest of somebody who is armed and may be suicidal.
24
Yeah, that's my question.
25
Is that bad leadership?
No, it's just an error.
Page: 592
Is that incompetence?
No.
Now, as you start to leave the station, you're
in two different cars; right?
Correct.
You're going to be following behind the lead
car which has the two sergeants in it?
Yes.
You're going to be a block-and-a-half away, and
10
somehow you're going to help make this arrest as part of
11
that five-man team; correct?
12
Correct.
13
Explain to a layperson -- I've never been a
14
police officer -- how it is, a block-and-a-half away,
15
you're going to help make an arrest of somebody with
16
just two guys, and somehow you're going to be involved
17
in that arrest.
18
Please explain that.
They're going to make contact with him and let
19
him know that he's under arrest.
20
he's going to go cooperatively, quietly.
21
would get there and be available just in case it wasn't
22
a cooperative and quiet arrest, and we could be there as
23
a team to help wrestle him down and take him into
24
custody.
25
And then hopefully

And then we
Excellent.
Page: 593
Before we pick up and you leave the location,
one other question, first.
you have an independent recollection of stopping just
after the gate behind you closes?
strike that.
As you leave the station, do
You have Ruiz and --
You have the two sergeants in front of you, and
Ruiz and you were in the car behind.
this?
Are you with me on
I am.
10
Do you recall Norling getting out of the car,
11
coming around, and giving you some additional concerns?
12
No, I don't remember that.
13
As a matter of fact, in your testimony in the
14
investigation, you indicated, "Yeah, I remember
15
stopping, but I think I yelled at them and I got out and
16
told them that I talked to Flores and told them where
17
everybody was or where Covarrubias was."
18
that.
Do you remember that?
19
MR. MILLER:
20
even understand the question.
Excuse me.
21
Can I have it read back?
22
MR. GONZALES:
23
24
25
Something like
That's vague.
Well, let me withdraw it.
I don't
want to make sure everybody understands.

Okay.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Page: 594
Do you remember an incident that before you
leave the actual property, that Norling gets out of the
car and comes over and gives you some more of his
concerns?
I remember -- I think I remember him getting
out of the car or me getting out of my car, but it
wasn't about concerns.
where he could find Covarrubias at the checkpoint, that
he was by the DUI trailer.
10
11
12
13
14
15
What it was was me telling him
That's the way I remember
it.
Q
Okay.
And he's in the lead car.
How would he
have known to stop with you behind him?

A
I must have yelled to him or something.
could have honked my horn.

Q
And then you get out of the car and you walk
16
over and lean over into his window and say, "This is
17
where Flores says that Covarrubias is," or words to that
18
effect?
19
20
21
22
I don't know if I got out of my car or he got
out of his car.

Q
Let's go ahead and play a couple of excerpts.
We are now on Volume Two, which is Exhibit 25.
23
Okay.
24
And we're going to go to Page 95, Line 25, to
25
96, Line 13.
Page: 595
record to hear the recording.
Okay.
Let's go off the
record, and you can state what other recording you would
like to play.
MR. GONZALES:
The next excerpt is going to be also Volume
Two, Exhibit 25, Page 105, Line 13, to 106, Line 10.
10
And then I'm going to give them all at this
11
Thank you.
time while we're on the record.
12
13
MR. GONZALES:
14
Line 1 to 23.
15
exhibit, 25.
16
17
That's all right.
Then I'm going to go to Page 89,
These are all going to be the same
Then we're going to go to Page 106, Line 12,

through 108-19.
18
19
Is that okay with you?
Then we're going to go to Page 90, Page (sic)

12 to 23.
20
21
MR. GONZALES:
22
23
MR. GONZALES:
24
25
MR. GONZALES:
90, 9-0?
9-0, yes, ma'am.

Okay.
And what line?
90, 12 to 23.
Thank you.
Then we're going to go to Page

Page: 596
91, 16 to 25.
2
3
And then we're going to go to Page 102, 17 to

25.
4
5
Okay.
Let's go off the
record to listen to the recordings.
record.
BY MR. GONZALES:
10
We're at the point in time where you apparently
11
have had a conversation with Flores; do you remember
12
that, Lieutenant Flores?
13
On -- yes.
14
Okay.
15
there.
16
I'm sorry.
I just jumped right in
I want to set the stage a little better.
Where
17
specifically were you when a telephone call was made to
18
Lieutenant Flores?
19
Still at the station.
20
Were you physically out of the back yard yet,
21
22
23
or had you started to progress towards the location?

A
I think I was standing next to my car in the
parking lot.
24
And what prompted you to call Flores?
25
Realizing that we needed to have somebody on
Page: 597
the inside.
About what time would this have been?
Assume
that the shooting takes place at 1:16 a.m., Saturday the
28th.
Probably about 1:05.
Okay.
11 minutes.
11 minutes earlier?
9
10
So what is that?
10, 11 minutes --
And you had made the decision to make the

arrest in the station sometime before that; correct?
11
Yes.
12
And, of course, you went through, first, Ruiz
13
and then the tactical issues, and then you called
14
Norling in and so on.
15
before you called him and not before that?
16
Called who?
17
Flores.
18
-- Flores?
Why was it it took you 11 minutes
Called --
I didn't think about giving him a
19
phone call, but then I realized we were light -- we were
20
short -- on the bodies.
21
two people making the contact initially, but that it
22
should be three people, at least, just to have extra
23
muscle there.
24
let him help out.
25
And I wasn't comfortable with
And so I figured I'd give him a call and
Isn't it true, sir, that you had been directed
Page: 598
by Ritz much earlier, approximately a little before
1:00, about 10, 15 to 1:00, to make that call to Flores,
and you didn't do it?
And I didn't do it?
And you didn't do it until 11 minutes before,
6
7
8
9
which would have been about 15, 18 minutes later?

A
I don't remember Ritz ever making -- ever
directing me to do that.
Q
10
Gotcha.
Okay.
By the way, all the excerpts that we just
11
listened to involved you with all the officers that were
12
going to be participating, Ruiz, Norling, and Nartatez;
13
correct?
14
Correct.
15
I didn't see Ritz anywhere on there.
16
involved in this, and he's still leading the
17
investigation?
18
He decided not to go.
19
So he had the watch commander go.
20
He wasn't
By the way, you weren't in uniform, were you?
21
Yes, I was.
22
You were -- you were in a lieutenant's car.
23
That was the issue.
24
the white Crown Vic?
25
Yes.
You were in the lieutenant's car,
Yes.
Page: 599
And so he has someone who's not involved in
this investigation, that is just a sounding board, go
out with the other arresting officers.
understanding?
Now he has me involved, yes.
Oh, now you get involved.
7
8
Is that your
What time would you estimate that you first get

involved in this investigation?
What time would --
Well, obviously I'm involved during
10
conversations and stuff very early on, starting on the
11
26th.
12
Okay.
13
But my --
14
Excuse me.
15
But my involvement was minimal.
16
17
18
Well --
Now, on this day, on the 28th, my involvement

is getting more and more.
Q
Well, before, you were just a sounding board,
19
from what I understood your testimony to be.
20
just a -- bounce stuff off you, get some ideas from you.
You were
21
Yes.
22
And then it was on the early morning part of --
23
strike that -- about 1 o'clock in the morning that you
24
get involved.
25
Is that what I've heard you to say?
Yes.
Page: 600
1
2
Okay.
Now, you -- this is your own decision to
call Flores, you indicate?
That seems to be my recollection, yes.
And whereabouts are you?
Are you about two
minutes, five minutes, ten minutes away from the
location, or can you give us an estimate?
Two to three minutes.
Okay.
So you're two to three minutes before
you get there to make this arrest with the two sergeants
10
in front of you and about a block-and-a-half in front of
11
you, I believe you indicated.
12
Yes.
13
And what was the specific plan?
How were they
14
going to make the arrest or this contact?
15
talking about contact.
16
contact on this armed officer that had some idea that he
17
may be arrested that night?
18
You keep
How are they going to make the
They were going to approach him hopefully where
19
he couldn't see them, go hands on, let him know that he
20
was under arrest.
21
Put hands on him, like grab him, touch him?
22
Well, we didn't exactly -- we didn't discuss
23
how they were going to do it, but this is how I would
24
have done it.
25
Well, excuse me for interrupting, but isn't it
Page: 601
your obligation now that you're involved, that you are
the senior person on scene, the lieutenant, to formulate
a plan to tell them exactly how to do this or at least
listen to them as to how they want to do this?
They were running short on time, and I didn't
think I needed to share with them how to make an arrest
on somebody.
8
9
You didn't think you needed to share with your
subordinates on how to arrest somebody in the field who
10
said he's suicidal, that he knew there was a possibility
11
of being arrested, and who was armed?
12
Well, I shared with them that it would be --
13
and they were aware that it would be a surprise and they
14
were using the element of surprise, so they would have
15
to make that decision for themselves about how to make
16
the arrest.
17
Is that a --
18
So no, I didn't share with them.
19
You're in a leadership role at this point,
20
aren't you?
21
Yes.
22
Is that what a good leader does, is to just
23
assume they're going to go ahead and make the arrest
24
without even formulating a plan?
25
In this case, with two very senior sergeants, I
Page: 602
figured that they could figure out how to arrest him.
Isn't that gross incompetence on your part?
No.
And of course you haven't lied at all
throughout this entire questioning?
No.
And you never lied when questioned by the
investigators?
No.
10
That's a correct statement that I'm making?
11
That's correct.
12
But two minutes away from this arrest that
13
you're not sure how it's going to be conducted, you
14
decide to then call Flores; correct?
15
Well, we're still at the station.
16
Okay.
17
18
And a couple minutes away.
And you tell
Flores what?
A
I tell him the circumstances; that we had a
19
cold call in to Covarrubias; that he was a suspect in a
20
sex crimes investigation; and that he was going to be
21
arrested; that he's suspected to possibly know that
22
we're coming or that we're -- not coming, but that he
23
suspects that we're onto him, that's a possibility; and
24
that he just went suicidal on a cold call and
25
disconnected the phone, so we were coming up there to
Page: 603
make the arrest.
him, stay close to him, and be there and be available to
be of assistance to the arrest team, and told him that
there was going to be a five-man team, but there was
going to be a delay between first two sergeants that got
there and myself and Ruiz.
him.
And then I asked that he stand by with
That's what I shared with
Anything else?
Not that I recall.
10
Did you tell him to tell the rest of the guys
11
out there that this might take place?
12
No.
13
Why?
14
Because that could tip off Covarrubias.
15
By telling the other fellows that there might
16
be an arrest in their presence of one of the other
17
officers, that they might tip him off.
18
19
20
He may not be able to accomplish that in a
short period of time that we had.

Q
Well, I guess that was my next question.
Why
21
did you give him only two minutes before you got there
22
to tell him this information, this vital information?
23
Because I realized when we were leaving at two
24
-- I just wasn't comfortable with two men.
25
we needed more than that.
I felt like
I felt like we needed a third

Page: 604
person in there.
And you felt comfortable about going out there
and not having the other officers know what was going to
take place or potentially take place?
5
6
No, I didn't feel comfortable with that, but
those were the circumstances.
And I'm not sure if I understood your answer
earlier.
made the call if this concern was yours earlier on?
Why did you wait for -- two minutes before you
10
Why did I wait two minutes?
11
Why did you wait until you were two minutes out
12
to call Flores if you knew that there was only going to
13
be a two-man hands-on earlier?
14
made that decision.
15
then instead of just two minutes before you get there?
Why didn't you call Flores way back
16
MR. MILLER:
17
18
You knew that when you
Misstates his testimony.

I'm sorry, could -- in
what respect?
19
MR. MILLER:
The question said that he made a
20
decision that there was going to be a two-man arrest
21
team.
That's not what's been testified to.
22
23
24
25
Can you rephrase, please?
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
When the decision was made -- who made the
decisions to do a two-man arrest team?
Page: 605
That was the initial plan when everybody was
throwing out their ideas, and then changing things,
modifying things.
call?
to know who that guy was.
Who made the
Who said it's going to be a two-man team?
I want
I think it was Commander Ritz.
9
10
11
12
that important event of who was in command to make that

decision that it's going to be a two-man team?
A
No, I think it was Commander Ritz initially
that was talking about two people.
13
That's your best recollection now?
14
Yes.
15
Now, my question is, when the decision was made
16
to have a two-man team earlier on, why did you wait up
17
until two minutes before the contact was to be made to
18
finally call Ritz?
19
Why didn't you call him sooner?
I waited before we rolled out of the station
20
because it just came to me that that was not going to be
21
adequate, that we would need more assistance.
22
It just came to you, meaning that there might
23
be a concern about only two guys being enough guys; is
24
that what you're saying?
25
Correct.
Page: 606
Is that good leadership quality, to make that
-- formulate that thought process two minutes before the
contact?
Is that a good leadership role?
I believe so, that I thought about it, yes.
It's a good thing you thought about it.
agree with that.
thought about it earlier on?
8
9
10
11
12
But don't you think you should have
Well, there was a lot going on.
lot of pressure going on.
There was a
So the fact that I thought
about it, I thought that that was good, yes.

Q
Was this too much pressure for you?
Was this
over your head?
13
No.
14
Or was it because the motivating factor was to
15
get Flores?
16
No, absolutely not.
17
Is that why you were rushing things to go out
18
there after all these officers and sergeants said,
19
"What's the rush?
20
because you wanted to get Flores or you wanted to have
21
this arrest in front of him and embarrass him?
Why are we doing this now?" is
22
No.
23
Isn't it true, sir, you wanted that motor job,
24
25
you wanted that overtime, and you wanted that car?

A
I didn't want the motor job.
Page: 607
We're at the point in time that you just told
Flores all that you just indicated to us, and did you
make any other calls to him between the time of this
first call to Flores and the time you get there?
Yeah, I think I spoke with him on the drive up.
My question is, did you call him?
I know he
called you one time.
between the time that you first called him to the time
you get there?
My question is, did you call him
10
I don't know if I did or not.
11
12
I don't --
that either, huh?
13
No, I don't.
14
In fact, there's no indication that you did and
15
there's no records that you did.
16
you?
17
18
19
22
No.
Let's go off the record
for a moment to discuss our scheduling.
20
21
Would that surprise
(Discussion held off the record.)

BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
Now, according to your statement, the reason
23
you didn't call him again is 'cause your eyes were
24
blurry.
25
you remember something like that?
You didn't have your glasses or something.
Do
Page: 608
Yes.
Tell us what that entails.
there?
I have bad close-up reading vision.
Uh-huh.
So it's -- I can't see things, for example, the
7
8
9
What was the deal
buttons on my cell phone.

Q
Gotcha.
it was blurry?
So that's why you didn't call, because

Your eyes would be blurry?
10
Yes.
11
Well, how was it you were able to make that
12
13
call a little bit earlier the first time?

A
'Cause I was standing near my car or outside my
14
car or inside my car when I was at the station where I
15
could either put my glasses on or I had better light.
16
believe I had my glasses on at that time.
17
You had a guy next to you, didn't you?
18
I did.
19
Why didn't you say, "Hey, how are your eyes?
Ruiz?
20
want you to make a call for me, find out where he is
21
right now"?
22
I'm sorry, I didn't hear the answer.
23
I didn't.
24
Why didn't you?
25
'Cause we were running out of time.
We were
Page: 609
driving up there, getting close.
You had a couple of minutes.
You've already
indicated that.
and you said that you would like to have, but you
couldn't because your eyes were blurry.
to you is why didn't you ask the guy next to you to do
it?
8
9
You've already made one call.
Now --
And my question
Because I was trying to do it with my phone.
And I was spending some time trying to do it that way.
10
And while I was driving, I -- text and drive so to
11
speak.
12
trailer so the time was out.
13
And then eventually we were getting close to the
So once you saw that it was blurry, why didn't
14
you just hand it over to Ruiz and say, "Hey, let's find
15
out where the heck Covarrubias is now.
16
from where he was before"?
17
Maybe he's moved
Because I told Lieutenant Flores to keep an eye
18
on him and tell me if he changes places, to give me a
19
call back.
20
Is that a good leadership role, sir?
21
Yes.
22
Was that incompetence on your part, sir?
23
No.
24
25
MR. GONZALES:
It might be a good place to
stop.
Page: 610
All right.
our luncheon recess at this time.
within the hour.
We'll take
Let's try to be back
We're off the record.
(A luncheon recess was taken from 12:48 p.m.
until 2:24 p.m. of the same day.)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page: 611
SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 2014
2:24 P.M.
--O0O--
4
5
6
Okay.
Let's go back on
the record.
We're back on the record.
We have returned
from our luncheon recess, and we had substantial
discussions off the record about the Motion to Compel,
10
that issue having arisen in connection with City
11
counsel's desire to use a portion of the Topham
12
investigative record to use for -- in the examination of
13
Lieutenant Ast.
14
this issue.
15
going to use or try to use any portion of that report
16
during his examination of this witness as part of his
17
case, not necessarily as part of his cross-examination
18
during any subsequent recalling of this witness.
19
this whole issue will be tabled until sometime later
20
towards the end of the city's case.
21
For the moment, we are again tabling
The City counsel has indicated he's not
So
So Lieutenant Ast, you're still under oath, and
22
Mr. Gonzales, you may proceed.
23
///
24
///
25
///
Page: 612
DANIEL AST,
Appellant herein, called as a witness under the
provisions of Section 776 of the Evidence Code,
was previously duly sworn and testified
further as follows:
6
7
8
9
CROSS-EXAMINATION (Resumed)
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
We left around the time that you were -- you
10
had -- you were almost out there making contact.
11
about where we left off.
12
second to make sure I'm clear.
13
That's
I want to go back just for a
You became part of the investigation at the
14
time that you leave to go to the arrest with the arrest
15
team, and at that point in time you no longer are a
16
sounding board.
Am I accurate?
17
MR. MILLER:
18
MR. GONZALES:
19
question.
20

Well, that's why I'm asking the
If I'm inaccurate, he can fill in the blank.

21
doesn't agree with that.
22
BY MR. GONZALES:
23
He can clarify if he
All I know is when you stop becoming a sounding
24
board and became part of the investigation, as I
25
understood it, is when you leave to go with the other
Page: 613
officers, the two sergeants and Officer Ruiz.
I became part of the arrest team at that point.
At that point.
4
5
Thank you.
And we've already established you were not

beforehand.
A sounding board, and that was it.
(Inaudible response.)
Before that, you were a sounding board, and
that was all?
10
Yes.
11
Going back to the 27th, do you know whether or
12
not Ritz went home ill?
13
I later learned.
14
You later learned that.
15
16
17
18
You didn't know that
until what point in time?

A
I didn't learn that until later in the evening,
probably 7 o'clock or so in the evening.

Q
Okay.
7:00 p.m.
And of course we know that he
19
wasn't brought back into the picture until about 12:30
20
on the 28th.
12:30 a.m. on the 28th?
21
Correct.
22
Who was leading the investigation when he was
23
out ill?
24
The two detective sergeants.
25
So they had no one above them?
Page: 614
No.
Obviously not you?
Right.
So there really was no commander or lieutenant;
it was just the two sergeants.
Meel and Flaa?
You're talking about Van
Flaa.
And they were the head of the investigation at
that point with no one -- no supervision above them?
10
Correct.
11
Okay.
12
Wouldn't it have been incumbent upon you
to obtain that -- or become part of those duties?
13
No.
14
Well, you didn't have any other -- it was
15
leaderless other than the two sergeants that were
16
investigators.
17
that Ritz was ill and he's out of the picture.
18
good leader, wouldn't you want to step in and take over
19
that part?
20
You became knowledgable about 7:00 p.m.
No, I wouldn't want to take over their
21
investigation.
22
sergeants that know quite frankly more about
23
investigations than I do in many respects.
24
25
board?
As a
They're two very qualified, tenured
Then why would they use you as a sounding
Page: 615
Because I used to work with them.
So it was just more of a buddy thing?
They respect my opinion.
They told you that or you just assume that?
I just assume that based on how they all come
to me with questions.
Would it surprise you to learn that they
believed that you were involved in the investigation
from the onset?
10
No, it wouldn't surprise me.
11
It would not surprise you that they believed
12
that you were involved in the litigation (sic) from the
13
onset, but you weren't?
14
15
(Interruption by the reporter.)

BY MR. GONZALES:
16
I meant "investigation."
17
Correct.
18
Now, we also established that you told Flores
19
and only Flores about two minutes before you get there
20
that you're coming and that he's part of that arrest
21
team?
22
23
Actually -- excuse me.
I actually called him
probably about five minutes before we got there.
24
Okay.
25
Part of it was on the ride -- part of it I was
I thought you said two, but that's fine.
Page: 616
in the car driving, so that's when we're getting into
the two-minute range.
while we were still at the station.
getting into the five-minute range.
Okay.
Part of it was outside.
It was
That's why we're
So to make sure I'm clear then, you
began the phone call before you left.
two minutes to get there, so that means you had about a
couple of minutes before you leave the facility?
It takes about
Correct.
10
So the phone call lasted about three minutes?
11
I think I might have made two phone calls to
Well, earlier you didn't have a recall of that.
12
13
14
15
16
17
him.
Do you recall making two calls now?

A
Either one or two, or I just stayed on the
phone when I got in the car.

Q
I gotta make sure I'm clear on this.
Do you
18
believe you had one or do you believe you had two, or
19
you don't know?
20
I really don't know.
21
Okay.
And you believe that it was five minutes
22
earlier that you begin the phone call, and if it's only
23
one, that means that that phone call lasted about three
24
minutes?
25
Probably about three minutes.
Page: 617
Okay.
And during that three minutes, you make
sure that you did not tell Flores to tell the other
eight or nine officers out there about what's going on;
correct?
I'm sorry, repeat that.
Of course.
During that three-minute,
approximate, conversation you had with Flores on the way
out there, you did not tell him to tell the other
officers, the other motor officers, what was going on;
10
correct?
11
Right.
12
Okay.
And you didn't do that because you were
13
fearful that the other officers would tell Covarrubias
14
that there's going to be an arrest of him?
15
Somehow that it would get out, that he would
16
hear it from conversations or something, somebody's
17
phone or through conversations that he could hear
18
person-to-person, that he would figure it out and be
19
more on an alerted stage.
20
Okay.
I want to play -- and this is going to
21
be Volume Two, which is Exhibit 25, Page 84, Line 18.
22
There's going to be two of them, so you may want to
23
write it down.
24
25
Page 84, Line 18, to 85-17, and then 85-18 to

87-18, both from Exhibit 25.
Page: 618
1
2
Okay.
Let's go off the
record to listen to the recording.
record.
6
7
Go ahead.
BY MR. GONZALES:
8
9
10
As indicated in the investigator's inquiry, it
took you about 15 minutes, approximately, to make that

decision to finally tell Flores; correct?
11
I don't remember the time.
12
Well, you remember what you just saw, don't
14
Yes.
15
You agreed to it in the interview; correct?
16
I agreed to what?
17
The length of time, 'cause you made a response
13
you?
18
about that 15 minutes, what you were doing during that
19
time.
20
I'm not sure I'm -- I'm not sure I'm --
21
It takes you 15 minutes to make a decision to
22
call Flores; correct?
23
24
25
I don't know if it took me 15 minutes to call
How much time did it take you to make that
him.
Page: 619
decision?
To give him a ring?
Yes, that's what we're talking about, to give
him a ring.
I don't know.
Can you give me a ballpark, an estimate?
minute?
Ten minutes?
One second?
Fifteen minutes?
One
Five minutes?
What's your best estimate?
From -- starting at what point?
10
When you first made a decision to make that
11
call.
12
You're looking puzzled.
13
Yeah, I am.
14
According to this last excerpt, you were
15
concerned about not telling Flores because you didn't
16
trust him.
17
a decision, "Well, I'm not going to call him 'cause I
18
don't trust him"?
19
20
21
When did that come about?
When did you make
I was having that feeling during the course of
the investigation.
Q
Okay.
And then about -- what did we say now --
22
five minutes before you leave or five minutes before you
23
get there, then you make a decision to tell Flores?
24
25
I remember being at my car and getting ready to
leave and going out there with -- with what was going to
Page: 620
be a four-man team and then thinking that this isn't
going to be enough.
was just a matter of seconds to have that thought get in
my head, not a matter of minutes.
5
6
Okay.
We need another person.
So that
Then you decided that you're going to
trust Flores?
Yes.
And what happened in your mind's thinking that
9
10
11
made you now trust him when you couldn't trust him
before?
A
It was an important issue.
He's a lieutenant.
12
And this is a different issue.
13
handle it.
14
He's physically strong.
15
able to find a way to keep Covarrubias there for
16
whatever reason we were going to be there for.
17
looks like he's a pretty good fighter.
18
he's in a pretty good shape, so if it came to a
19
resistance situation, he would be a good man to be
20
there.
21
22
He's going to be able to
He's a good sized guy.
He's in good shape.
It wouldn't be -- he would be
And he
Like I said,
You had nine other guys out there,
approximately, in addition to Flores; correct?
23
Correct.
24
And you didn't think it would be wise to tell
25
any of the other nine guys to assist potentially;
Page: 621
correct?
Correct.
And you didn't feel that -- you felt that way
because you were fearful that they might leak it to
Covarrubias; correct?
Correct.
So you thought that Flores, who had this
history of leaking, that you could trust him just a few
hours earlier, and he apparently leaked something;
10
correct?
11
Correct.
12
And the other nine guys that were out there,
13
14
you couldn't trust any of them?

A
It's not that I couldn't trust them.
It's just
15
that when you tell more than one person or one person,
16
there's always the risk of them telling the next person,
17
somebody else telling the next person, and then finally
18
it gets through to somebody.
19
I think -- I think the chief or when somebody else was
20
up here on the stand saying -- or maybe it was Rick
21
Haydon, that when things are said at the police station,
22
it's known instantly, and that's the way it is at that
23
police department.
24
25
And so that's the problem.
Things are known instantly.
To make sure I'm clear, had the other nine
persons been told that Covarrubias was going to be
Page: 622
arrested because he was molesting a 17-year-old girl,
your fear was that one those guys was going to go tell
Covarrubias, "Hey, you're going to get arrested for
messing around or molesting a 17-year-old"?
police officers.
Is that what you're telling us?
These are
That's what you're concerned about.
My fear would be that he would see a lot of
people grouping up, having a conversation that he wasn't
involved in, and that he was going to be able to put two
10
and two together and realize they were talking about him
11
since they weren't talking with him.
12
That was my fear.
Did you have the consideration of having Flores
13
tell one or two other fellows, just a couple of big guys
14
out there?
15
No.
16
Why didn't that come to your mind if you had
17
the consideration I won't tell any of them because of a
18
leak?
19
It just didn't come to my mind.
20
21
Yes.
22
It is?
23
No.
24
In fact, weren't -- didn't Ruiz make that
25
Wouldn't that be incompetence?
suggestion to you on the way out there, "Hey,
Page: 623
Lieutenant, let's get a couple of guys out there.
They're not going to be a surprise to him because
they've been out there all night.
Let's use them to
tackle him and get him arrested"?
Do you remember Ruiz
telling you that?
No, I don't.
You don't remember it, or no, it never
happened?
No, I don't remember it ever being told to me.
10
If that had been told to you, would you have
11
12
jumped on that idea and accepted it?

A
Well, it wouldn't have been up to me.
It would
13
have been up to Ritz if we were back at the station
14
talking about that conversation.
15
16
there.
17
we're about three minutes away from this thing.
18
get ahold of Flores and have him get a couple of big
19
guys and have him take care of business instead of us,
20
who are going to be showing up as out of the norm."
21
Let's assume that it happened on your drive out

Ruiz is sitting next to you.
"Hey, Lieutenant,
Let's
Well, once again, I would have been concerned
22
about the timing.
23
us to get up there.
24
with two or three guys of a large size might be a
25
giveaway.
He was stalling, trying to wait for

And then for him to have a pow-wow
I don't know if that plan would have worked.
Page: 624
Did you take that into account?
I wasn't thinking of two extra motors going up
there and helping him arrest --
Not two extra motors --
I wasn't thinking of having him with a couple
extra motors assisting him making the arrest.
not.
I was
You were not.
I don't think it's bad leadership; it's just a
10
11
thought I didn't have.

Q
When you were going out there, you decided to
12
call Flores because you didn't think the two hands-on
13
guys was enough.
So you had one more --
14
Correct.
15
-- Flores.
16
Because you and Ruiz were a block-and-a-half
17
away, so you certainly were not going to be in a
18
position to go hands-on at the same time as the two
19
sergeants; accurate?
20
Correct.
21
So you thought one more guy would do the trick?
22
Correct.
23
And you were a couple minutes away, five to
24
three minutes away, somewhere in that neighborhood;
25
correct?
Page: 625
Probably about two to three minutes away.
And you felt that three would be sufficient,
but maybe not two more or one more, one other motor
officer?
The two sergeants plus a motor officer plus the
two of us eventually would be enough to get him in
control.
We've already established that you would not be
able to be there with hands-on because you're a
10
block-and-a-half away, so it's really those two
11
sergeants.
12
It depends how quick they had to go hands-on.
13
Well, you're a block-and-a-half away.
They're
14
going to get there -- whatever that time difference is.
15
You're going to have to park your car, get out.
16
meantime, they're going to be approaching, which is
17
exactly what happened; correct?
In the
18
Correct.
19
And you weren't there until after you parked
20
the car when the shot was fired; correct?
21
Correct.
22
So you weren't really going to be hands-on,
23
24
25
correct, at the same time the two sergeants were?

A
If it would have taken them a little longer to
go hands-on with him, we would have been there.
It
Page: 626
happened very quickly.
If, in fact, the two sergeants and Ruiz had
indicated to you that they all had these red flags,
would you have stopped that plan?
If the two sergeants and Ruiz --
-- all said there are red flags, "Listen,
Lieutenant, nobody out there knows what's going on.
We're not going to have the element of surprise in all
likelihood because he knows there's an investigation.
10
He's armed.
11
there.
12
flags, Lieutenant,"
13
before you left, would you have gone to make the arrest
14
the way you did?
15
He's suicidal.
We don't usually go out
This is out of the norm.
These are all red
If they had told you all that
I would have ran all that through Craig Ritz,
16
and him and I were having conversations about where we
17
were at and what the risks were, and I would have taken
18
that into consideration.
19
If those same complaints were as you were
20
traveling after you left the station, and we know Ritz
21
was still back there, would you have continued on, or
22
would you have turned around and gone back and talked to
23
Ritz?
24
I would have continued on.
25
I'm sorry?
Page: 627
I would have continued on because I was having
all those same thoughts, too, and thinking we could
still succeed, that we still had a chance to save him.
there.
arrived at the location, in those five to three minutes,
whatever it was, you left and had discovered that he no
longer was at the trailer; correct?
Let's talk about what really did happen out

Once the two officers -- once the two sergeants
Correct.
10
And you weren't sure really where he was at the
11
checkpoint; correct?
12
Correct.
13
And you're about a block-and-a-half away from
14
the sergeants; correct?
15
Correct.
16
And the sergeants obviously, at some point in
17
time, make contact with him or at least have a visual of
18
him; correct?
19
Yes.
20
And then your understanding is that they get
21
out, start to approach.
22
sees them get close.
23
closer, grabs -- tries to grab him.
24
the ground, he's able to unholster his gun, fire off one
25
round.
He starts to back away when he
Nartatez, who is a little bit

As they're going to
Page: 628
Well, I didn't see any of that so --
Is that your understanding of what occurred?
That's my understanding of what occurred after
4
5
6
being told about the investigation.

Q
As he goes down, he has one round go off.
There's a struggle on the ground.
Yes.
Norling, who is now a little bit behind
Nartatez, catches up.
10
"Help, help.
11
"Help me."
And he hears Nartatez yelling,
He's got a gun," words to that effect.
12
And Nartatez is trying to -- rather, Norling is
13
grasping hold of the gun hand, which is his left hand at
14
that time.
Correct, to your understanding?
15
Yes.
16
He's also asking for help; correct?
17
I didn't hear that part in the investigation.
18
Okay.
And then Matt Kline comes over when he
19
hears the assistance call or the "help" from Nartatez
20
and fires three rounds; correct?
21
Correct.
22
Where are you when that first round goes off?
23
When the first round goes off, I was in the
24
25
driveway east of the location.

Q
Just parking?
Page: 629
2
3
I was getting -THE HEARING OFFICER:
for just a moment.
(Discussion held off the record regarding the
witness's microphone.)
record.
8
9
I think we may have not completed the answer,

so maybe we could have the reporter read the question
10
and how much of the answer had been given in case
11
there's something that got cut off.
12
(The record was read as follows:
13
"Q
14
Where are you when that first round
goes off?
15
"A
16
When the first round goes off, I was
in the driveway east of the location.
17
"Q
Just parking?
18
"A
I was getting --")
19
BY MR. GONZALES:
20
You were getting --
21
I was driving through the parking lot and
22
23
24
25
getting ready to get out of the car.

Q
Do you recall a -- withdrawn.

Now, you did not want to have Covarrubias see
your white Crown Vic.
It was an obvious lieutenant's

Page: 630
car; correct?
2
3
Not 'til the sergeants were already with him.
That was my hope, that he wouldn't see my car.
I'm sorry.
Not until the sergeants were already with him.
I didn't hear that.
I'll bring it closer (referring to microphone).
Thank you.
That was not my hope, that -- that he would see
9
10
my car, until the sergeants were already with him, if he

saw my car at all.
11
12
concern about that?
13
14
That I'm a lieutenant, and nobody likes to see
the lieutenant's car.
15
16
And if he did see your car, what was your
Well, it was out of the norm for you to be out
there, wouldn't it be?
17
No, not me, not in the field.
18
It would be normal for you to go out to the DUI
19
It was normal.
checkpoints?
20
To drive past them, yes.
21
Did you do that very often?
22
Yes.
23
How often would you estimate in a month you did
24
25
that?
A
That may have been the only checkpoint that we
Page: 631
even had that I was working on that month.
know.
3
4
I'd have to check.

Q
In one year's time, how many times did you go
by in a Crown Vic by the DUI checkpoints?
MR. MILLER:
his work schedule.
BY MR. GONZALES:
8
9
That lacks foundation in terms of
The question is, within one year's time, did
you ever go by a DUI checkpoint?
10
11
would have.
12
13
I don't
If I was working the night shift, I probably
Do you have an independent recollection of ever
doing so?
14
No.
15
Wasn't it true that that was a concern that
16
Ruiz had?
17
there -- it's never going to be by there -- he's going
18
to know something's up," words that effect?
19
"Hey, Lieutenant, if you bring that car by
I think I remember something about that, and
20
that's why I made the decision to stay about a
21
block-and-a-half back, so they can get there first and
22
make contact with them.
23
24
25
Okay.
Do you recall Ruiz saying, "Wait, slow
down, you're getting too close"?

A
I recall him saying, "Wait."
Page: 632
And how did you interpret that to mean?
He said it when I was already in the parking
lot and I was pulling forward to where the shots were
coming from.
he was talking about was that we were in some kind of a
crossfire and he wanted me to stop the car altogether
and hunker down because there was a crossfire situation.
He was just involved -- he just came back from a pretty
severe shooting situation himself, and the way I
10
And he said, "Wait."
And I thought what
interpreted it, I thought he was freezing up.
11
You thought he was freezing up?
12
Yes, I did.
13
And when you say "freezing up," what did you
14
15
16
17
mean?
He was scared?
A
He got panicky?
That he got panicky based on the situation and
not knowing where the fire was heading.

Q
To make sure I'm clear, so far we've got
18
Flores, who you've got criticisms of because he leaked
19
the information earlier; correct?
20
Correct.
21
We've got a criticism of Flores -- strike that
22
-- of Ruiz because you think he might have panicked due
23
to what happened earlier; correct?
24
25
I thought he was having some kind of a panic
reaction.
Page: 633
I just want to make sure I know.
You had
concerns of the other nine officers that they might leak
to Covarrubias that he's going to be arrested.
that's why you didn't tell any of them that you were
coming; correct?
So
Correct.
Did you take into account that any of these
other nine officers might be confused if there was a
struggle that takes place between Covarrubias and one of
10
the arresting officers?
11
I did.
12
Or sergeants?
13
And what did you do to try to alleviate that
14
issue?
15
That's the reason -- one of the reasons why I
16
notified Lieutenant Flores, because he's the leader in
17
charge of the traffic unit, and he would be there to be
18
a voice to tell them that he's being placed under
19
arrest, and that could be said very quickly.
20
Earlier, I believe you indicated that you did
21
not have time to tell Norling that Flores was one of the
22
five arresting team members; right?
23
Yes.
24
And what prevented you from calling him and
25
I believe I said that.
letting him know while you were driving out there in
Page: 634
those five minutes or whatever time it was, to let him
know that he had a fifth guy out there?
We were getting closer to the checkpoint, and I
couldn't -- my phone is basically the same kind of phone
that I carry right now.
And the light comes on, but with my reading glasses not
being on, I couldn't see it.
8
9
10
Why didn't you ask Ruiz, sitting right next to
you, "Hey, get ahold of Norling.
Let him know we have a
fifth guy out there"?
11
12
It's one of the flip phones.
Because we were getting close to the DUI
trailer at that point.
13
Did you make an attempt?
14
I made an attempt to try to get to my phone,
No, my question is, did you have Ruiz make an
15
16
17
yes.
attempt to make the call?
18
No.
19
Why?
20
Because there wouldn't have been time.
21
22
23
24
25
They
were already getting close to the trailer.

Q
Let's go back in time, if I can, to the
beginning of the 26th, before I go forward again.

Did you ever contemplate bringing the Sheriff's
-- the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department in as the
Page: 635
investigating agency instead of having your own?
Yes.
And why didn't you -- why didn't you make that
decision, to have them come in?
point.
going to turn out just to be nothing.
-- if that's the case, they don't come in and take over
something unless it's a crime and it's something kind of
10
We didn't really know what we had at that

We didn't know if we had a crime or if it was
And they weren't
substantial.
11
We had been in a shooting situation just three
12
weeks before this one, and we had multiple shootings
13
throughout the year, and the Sheriff's Department was to
14
the point where they were not wanting to do
15
investigations for us anyway.
16
and stuff, and they weren't interested in doing our
17
investigations for us anymore.
18
they would be interested in taking this one, especially
19
if we didn't have any criminal attached to it.
20
21
Gotcha.
We've had some domestics
So I didn't think that
This makes sense.
Of course.
They're
getting overloaded with your stuff.
22
So you made the decision not to bring them in,
23
but you were not a participant in the leadership of the
24
investigation.
25
You're just a sounding board.
Why was it you who made that decision not to
Page: 636
bring the Sheriff's in?
MR. MILLER:
Go ahead.
THE WITNESS:
Why was it you?
That's what I was thinking.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Wait a minute.
You just indicated that it was
your decision, because they were too over -- too much
involved --
Well --
10
-- in other investigations.
11
But you were not
part of that investigation, so why would it be you?
12
Ritz could have made that call if he chose to,
13
if he wanted to try to bring them in.
14
advice, that they're not going to be wanting to come
15
into something that we don't even know what we're
16
getting ourselves into.
17
That was my
You were very much involved in this
18
investigation, weren't you?
19
you?
You were the lead, weren't
20
No, I was not.
21
Do you have any idea as to why Van Meel
22
believes you were the lead?
23
Probably because I was talking -- I'm sorry.
24
Go ahead.
25
Probably because I was talking with him more
Page: 637
1
2
3
than he was talking with Commander Ritz.

Q
Do you have any idea as to why Flaa believed
that you were the lead?
4
5
MR. MILLER:
hasn't been established.
6
7
That
But anyway, let's go.
I think that he was part
of the original group.
8
9
That lacks foundation.
MR. MILLER:
My issue is a little different.
What I'm suggesting is it lacks foundation because it
10
hasn't been established that Flaa believed that or that
11
Van Meel believed that he was the investigator.
12
I'm assuming counsel's
13
making a representation as to what these individuals are
14
going to testify to.
15
MR. MILLER:
16
I'm just making sure the record is
clear.
17
18
Go ahead.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I understand.
BY MR. GONZALES:
Q
Do you have any idea why Flaa thought you were
the lead?
A
Because they were sounding things off of me --
bouncing things off of me.

Q
Does it surprise you to learn that Ruiz
believed you were the lead?
Page: 638
No.
And both Norling and -- or Norling and Nartatez
3
4
5
6
both believed that you were the lead?

A
No, it doesn't surprise me.
talker than Craig Ritz was.

Q
I was more of a
I was much more vocal.
So Ritz was really the one that was -- I'm
talking about now a time period from about -- from a
suicide call.
involved in a suicide, Ritz was pretty much the lead as
10
Once you learn that the Covarrubias was
far as your testimony is concerned; correct?
11
Correct.
12
He was being pretty vocal.
13
Obviously he had to
be because he was involved in this.
14
He was being pretty vocal?
15
Yeah, Ritz.
16
Well, with me, but he wasn't being real vocal
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
with everybody else.

Q
He's a quiet guy.
I'm going to read from Page 78 of Exhibit 25,
Lines 18 through 23.

A
Page 75?
MR. GONZALES:
"Q
Okay.
78, 18 to 23:
Was Ritz there listening to
all of this?
24
"A
Yes.
25
"Q
Okay.
And what was his input?
Did
Page: 639
he give you any input, suggestions or anything.
"A
3
4
He was very quiet because you were doing it
all.
Isn't that true?
5
6
He was very quiet."
A
person.
He was very quiet because he's a very quiet

That's his nature.
Would it surprise you to learn that Flores
denies that you ever told him he was part of an arrest
team?
10
Yes, that would surprise me.
11
Would it surprise you that Norling never
12
believed there was a five-man arrest team; it was just a
13
two-man arrest team?
14
I don't know how -- I didn't tell Mark Norling
15
as much as I told everybody else because my conversation
16
with him was brief.
17
window of his car in the driver's seat, so that's a
18
possibility.
19
It was through the rolled down
Would it surprise you to learn that Norling --
20
that Nartatez did not know it was a five-man arrest
21
team?
22
Yes, that would surprise me.
23
Would it also surprise you that Ruiz had no
24
25
idea it was a five-man arrest team?

A
Ruiz knew that it was a multiple-man arrest
Page: 640
1
2
team.
He was with me in the car.

Q
I want to talk to you about some other topics
for a minute, and then I'm going to let your counsel
take over.
5
6
7
Describe the incident involving this stun gun

if you will, please.
A
Sure.
I don't remember the date.
into the report-writing room.
officers that were in there.
I walked
There was a group of
10
What were their names, please?
11
Ernie Salinas, Jesse Garcia, Mike McGheehe.
12
Anyone else?
13
And --
14
That's fine.
15
I'm not sure.
16
If it comes to you.
17
Louis Tenore.
18
I'm sorry?
19
I believe it was Louis Tenore who might have
20
been the fourth person.
21
And you walk in, and they're talking?
22
Yes.
23
And what are they discussing?
24
They're joking about a stun gun that was
25
sitting up on the report-writing table that somebody
Page: 641
took off of -- somebody's evidence.
And then what occurs?
They were laughing.
They were challenging each
other to stun each other, somebody stun somebody.
they were laughing about that, and nobody would stun
themselves.
And
They were talking about some money, weren't
they?
"I bet you 20 bucks you won't do it"?
10
Yes, a bet came up for 20 dollars to do it.
11
And then at some point, you said, "20 bucks?
12
I'll do it.
13
14
15
16
I'll take that bet," words to that effect?
I'm not sure if I said anything, but I did take
the gun and turn it on and touched it to my leg.

Q
And at some point in time, you got your 20
bucks, didn't you?
17
Yes.
18
And these were -- of course, you were a
19
lieutenant at the time, obviously?
20
Yes.
21
These were just officers; correct?
22
Correct.
23
And is there a policy about stunning yourself?
24
No.
25
Do you think that shows a good leadership
Page: 642
quality?
I didn't think it was a bad thing.
It was kind
of a lighthearted moment.
in my opinion, so I thought that there was some value in
it.
It was also a training thing
Are you suggesting that you told these three
gentleman, at least, or four, that, "I'm going to show
you the training on this," or words to that effect, and
then stunned yourself?
10
No.
11
But now you're telling us that it's a training
12
event?
13
Yes.
14
Do you think that shows incompetence on your
15
part?
16
No, sir.
17
Now, your theory is that Chief Martin, when he
18
came on in August of 2012, that he continued to
19
retaliate against you; is that right?
20
Yes.
21
And you believe he was told by someone above
22
him to do so?
23
I don't know if he was or not.
24
Do you think he just decided to do it on his
25
I just --
own, a man you'd never met before?
Page: 643
I met him when he came here to the station.
And that's when the retaliation began; right?
You'd never seen him before then; correct?
Correct.
And you believe that a man who had never seen
you or knew you from before comes on board and starts to
retaliate against you; correct?
Yes.
And do you believe it was at the direction of
10
11
12
13
someone above him or in the City?

A
I could only speculate that it could have been
Rick Haydon or somebody else in the city.

Q
And for that to have occurred, obviously they
14
would have had to convey that decision or that
15
requirement of Chief Haydon -- of Chief Martin; correct?
16
Correct.
17
And so you're suggesting that Haydon tells
18
Martin, "If you want this job, you've got to continue to
19
retaliate against Ast and a couple of other guys," words
20
to that effect?
21
I doubt he would have said it like that.
22
How do you think he said it?
23
MR. MILLER:
24
knows.
25
BY MR. GONZALES:
Calls for speculation, if he
Page: 644
This whole theory is speculation, but since
it's your theory, I think I'm entitled to ask questions
about it.
4
5
I want to know how you think it was said to

Chief Martin.
That he had a group of whistle-blowers amongst
him in the high ranks, higher ranks, and that he's going
to have to deal with that.
9
10
And so I want to know, how do you think Haydon
told Martin to retaliate against you?
11
I don't know specifically how he told him, but
12
just that he would have to deal with the fact that he's
13
got three whistle-blowers working for him.
14
It would be a fair statement then that Martin
15
would have had to accept that condition before he
16
becomes chief; correct?
17
Correct.
18
And you think that Chief Martin, who didn't
19
know you, would say, "Sure, I'll retaliate against him
20
and them"; correct?
21
I'm not sure how to answer that question.
22
It's kind of important because that is your
23
theory about how and why Martin is retaliating against
24
you.
25
you come to that belief.
So I think it's pretty critical that we hear how
Page: 645
I just believe, based on the way things
happened, that Mr. Haydon or somebody else in the City
must have said something to him, that he's got three
problems on his hands and he's going to need to do
something about it.
conversation went.
That's --
And that's probably the way the
That's illegal, isn't it?
-- all my belief.
10
11
Yes, it is.
Q
And do you think that Chief Martin is willing
12
to, from what you know of the man now that you've been
13
with him for two years, that he's going to jeopardize
14
his career and his own future to retaliate against a guy
15
that he's never met before?
16
I haven't been with him for two years, but I
17
don't know how he works.
18
came here.
Never met him before 'til he
19
And he had never met you, obviously?
20
No.
21
And he's just going to say, "Okay, I'm going to
22
retaliate against these guys?
23
it's illegal, but that's okay."
24
25
Never met him before,
That's what you're suggesting, isn't it?

A
Yes.
Page: 646
1
2
is you believe you're being retaliated against?
4
5
And the only evidence you have to support that
Yes.
MR. MILLER:
That's overbroad.
BY MR. GONZALES:
And you don't believe that it was because of
any incompetence on your part that resulted in a man's
death; correct?
Correct.
10
And you don't believe that when Ruiz will
11
testify, as he did in his statement to the investigators
12
that Martin took into account, that you responded to
13
Ruiz when he said, "What happens if Covarrubias draws on
14
us," and you just said, "Just kill him," twice?
15
don't think that Martin took that into account when he
16
made a decision to terminate you?
17
I don't think it was -- I think that was taken
18
out of context.
19
used.
20
That's not me.
21
You
I don't think those exact words were
I wouldn't have been that callus about it.
That's not who I am.
Would it surprise you to learn that Ruiz, first
22
of all, made those statements in the investigation, and
23
he's going to be testifying here in the next day or two
24
or some future point in time and say that very same
25
thing?
Page: 647
No.
That you said it twice, "Just kill him.
Just
kill him"?
MR. MILLER:
It's argumentative.
He's --
Yeah, I think we've
exhausted everything that can be gotten from the witness
on this point.
BY MR. GONZALES:
9
10
Was there ever any discussion about using less
than lethal weapons to subdue Covarrubias?
11
No.
12
Why is that?
13
Because we were going with the element of
14
surprise, so you're -- you go carrying what you have
15
with you, pepper spray and stun guns.
16
have with you, and maybe your baton, whatever the guys
17
are carrying.
That's all you
18
There was a discussion and some questions that
19
were asked about a riot shield and the use of a sniper,
20
and those things wouldn't have worked with our scenario
21
based on the element of surprise.
22
Well, really, you had indicated earlier in your
23
testimony you weren't certain that you had a surprise.
24
You were just hoping that you did.
25
Correct.
Page: 648
When you filed your January 16th claim, the
2012 grievance, nowhere in the body of that do you make
mention of any safety factors, do you?
I'd have to see it.
Well, let me just read it to you.
the opening statement.
I'll
We did it at
do so again.
This is dated January 16, 2012.
"Formal Employee Grievance, Santa Maria
Police Department, Lieutenant Dan Ast."
10
Dispute or problem occurring is
11
"ongoing."
12
"Santa Maria PD."
13
"Description of grievance:
Retaliation
14
and threats against me by the chief of police
15
and/or others for, among other things,
16
complaining about the denial of meal and rest
17
breaks."
18
Now, you weren't getting paid for those, and
19
you believed you should have been; correct?
20
Correct.
21
"Making a Workers' Compensation claim."
22
23
You had injured your shoulder as I recall;

correct?
24
Yes.
25
And it was with that you believe Macagni was
Page: 649
upset with you?
Macagni, yes.
Matter of fact, I remember reading someplace
that was one of the reasons you believed you were being
terminated, was because of a Workers' Compensation
claim; correct?
7
8
9
That's one of the reasons why I felt I was
being retaliated against.

Q
"Complaining about disparate application
10
of the department disciplinary treatment by
11
quashing or avoiding IA investigations for
12
friends of the chief or people the chief wanted
13
to promote."
14
Correct?
15
Correct.
16
"Complaining about favoritism within the
17
department."
18
Also correct?
19
Correct.
20
"Complaining about improper assignment of
21
overtime."
22
23
24
25
You weren't getting your share of the overtime,

were you?
A
No, it was improper assignment of overtime.
That's different than what you're referring to.
That's
Page: 650
1
2
3
4
5
a safety hazard.
Q
Did you believe that Flores was hoarding the
overtime and not sharing it with the others?

A
I did, but if I could answer your last
question, I didn't get a chance to answer it.
I'm sorry.
Can you read the statement again or the
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I don't mean -- please do.
sentence on the overtime?

Q
Absolutely.
"Complaining about improper
assignment of overtime."
A
That's the health and safety factor that I was
considering.
Q
Why didn't you just say this is a health and
safety factor?
You've got a lot of room here.
15
MR. MILLER:
16
MR. GONZALES:
17
18
forward.
19
BY MR. GONZALES:
20
It's argumentative.
It's up to you.
Sustained.
Let's go
Isn't it true that you had said that he was
21
hoarding all of his money -- all this money, this grant
22
money?
23
MR. MILLER:
You know, one objection.
He's
24
actually reading now from this other statement that he
25
said he withdrew earlier and didn't want to get into.
Page: 651
MR. GONZALES:
I'm paraphrasing that which he
testified to previously, and I think I'm entitled to ask
a question as to whether or not he made a statement.
MR. MILLER:
I want it to be clear for the
record.
investigation that he doesn't want to give us, and now
he's reading the statements of my client in that
investigation, in pieces.
what's happening here.
10
He's actually going back to the Topham
11
Well, I thought he was
reading from the complaint letter.
12
13
I just want it to be clear
MR. GONZALES:
No, I'm asking a separate
question.
14
MR. MILLER:
But this is the same question he
15
started to ask when he wanted to go into the Topham
16
investigation.
17
Let's refrain from using
18
that document until we get that motion ironed out.
19
BY MR. GONZALES:
20
21
Didn't you believe that Flores was hoarding the
grant money?
22
Yes.
23
You weren't getting your share?
24
I was getting my share because I wasn't worried
25
about the actual money.
Page: 652
1
2
So the answer to my question is no; is that
correct?
No.
And to make sure the record is clear, isn't it
true that you were complaining about not getting your
share of the grant money that Flores was not giving you?
It's either a yes or a no.
No, I wasn't worried about that, personally.
Going back to the last portion of the
10
grievance, "Retaliation has included, among other
11
things, taking away my home vehicle and disparate
12
treatment."
13
Correct.
14
Nowhere in there does it say there are safety
15
factors, and that's why I'm concerned about this, and
16
that's why I'm a whistle-blower, did you?
17
18
MR. MILLER:
20
the bend on that one.
21
BY MR. GONZALES:
23
I think we've been around
I understand the testimony.
You were not in the union until recently -- or
withdrawn.
24
25
Misstates
the evidence.
19
22
That's argumentative.
When did you join the union?

A
I dropped out of the union for about a
Page: 653
year-and-a-half, I believe.
-- probably got back into it around January or so.
And then I was in the union
January of what year?
It was when the chief took the sergeants and
lieutenants out and then you had to be a hundred percent
or no for going into the union, so I had to get back
into the union.
know the date.
9
10
And whatever date that was.
I don't know.
I don't
Can you give me a rough
estimate?
11
12
don't know.
13
Maybe spring of 2013.
Spring of 2013.
I'm just guessing.
This was just before you filed
14
your disability retirement, wasn't it, when you took off
15
because of a disability, stress leave?
16
I took off November 7th.
17
You joined the union just before your
18
termination, before you got your letter in March?
19
7th, I believe it was, of 2013.
20
21
again.
22
March
I'm not sure exactly when I joined the union

It's a matter of record.
Yeah.
And when you joined that union just
23
before you were terminated, you had asked them to pick
24
up your legal bills through this -- for these
25
proceedings; correct?
Page: 654
MR. MILLER:
Excuse me.
I think there's a
privilege attached to that, number one.
it's irrelevant.
4
5
MR. GONZALES:
Number two,
It's certainly relevant, but I
don't know of any privilege.
MR. GONZALES:
What does it go to?
It goes to money.
It goes to
the motive that we've stressed that's been the
motivating factor throughout this, which is why I wanted
10
to get into the overtime, which is why I think the
11
20-dollar bill is at issue, which is why the take-home
12
car was important, and a litany of other things that
13
I'll eventually get to through other witnesses.
14
I just don't see how
15
whether or not the union would finance his case is
16
something that would assist me in making findings.
17
But --
18
BY MR. GONZALES:
19
20
didn't you?
21
I think that's true.
22
You also indicated you were out of the union
23
You had indicated that you're not a union man,
I'm not.
for an extended period of time?
24
That's true.
25
And I think you made a comment that the chief
Page: 655
forced the sergeants and the lieutenants out of the
union that they were in before; correct?
That's correct.
And isn't it true that there was a vote and the
vote was majority that they were to separate themselves
from the officers because of conflict?
I didn't vote, but it's my understanding that
the vote happened after the chief already separated the
people out.
10
My question is very clear.
Wasn't there a
11
majority vote in favor of separating the sergeants and
12
the lieutenants from the officers?
13
That's my understanding.
14
Another one of your allegations was Alicia
I didn't vote.
15
Lara, the assistant city manager, leaked information,
16
your grievance, to Macagni; is that correct?
17
Yes.
18
And what evidence do you have to support that?
19
Well, we filed our complaint, and within a
20
couple of days, the information already got back to the
21
traffic unit, and Lieutenant Flores silenced the traffic
22
unit from speaking with any of the three lieutenants.
23
So I know it wasn't me, Jim, or Norm because we were
24
sworn to secrecy.
25
have come through was Alicia Lara talking to perhaps
And the only other person it could
Page: 656
Mr. Haydon or talking to the chief of police or somebody
else in the City.
police.
4
5
But it got back to the chief of
You don't think one of the three of you was
bragging, "Hey, we filed a complaint"?
I know that didn't happen.
And, of course, you have no idea whether Ginter
or Come did, do you, 'cause you weren't with them 24/7
from that time forward?
10
I know that we were sworn to secrecy on that.
11
I understand that, but you don't know whether
12
13
they said anything or not, do you?

A
14
15
No.
MR. GONZALES:
Thank you, sir.
questions.
16
THE WITNESS:
17
18
Thank you.
Okay.
Does anyone need a
break before we start Mr. Miller's questioning?
19
THE WITNESS:
20
21
No other
I need to go to the restroom.

All right.
Let's take
just a short break.
22
(Recess taken.)
23
24
record.
25
BY MR. GONZALES:
Mr. Gonzales has another question, so go ahead.
Page: 657
Mr. Ast, you filed a lawsuit in federal
district court in April of this year; is that correct,
through your attorneys?
Yes, I believe so.
I'm sorry?
I believe that was the date.
What are you alleging, if you know?
I believe that's the date.
MR. MILLER:
THE WITNESS:
Retaliation against me.
10
MR. GONZALES:
11
THE WITNESS:
12
13
MR. MILLER:
14
It's overbroad.
You're welcome.
Okay.
Cross-examination?

Or I guess it's really
15
direct examination since this was an as of cross-type
16
witness.
17
MR. MILLER.
It is.
18
19
20
21
22
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
that weren't covered just in terms of your background.
23
24
25
I want to start a little bit with some things
Where do you live, without giving your address,

just in general?
A
In the south end of Santa Maria, California.
Page: 658
And are you married?
Yes.
How long have you been married?
For 20 years.
Do you have any children?
An 18-year-old boy.
Do you currently have a job?
No, I do not.
How long have you been unemployed?
10
Since November -- November 7th of 2013.
11
You mean when the discipline became final here?
12
Yes.
13
I'm sorry.
Since June 20th I've been
14
unemployed.
15
Thank you.
16
2013.
17
Let's talk about your prior employment history.
18
2013?
Before being a police officer, did you have any
19
other law -- well, let me take a step back.
20
that, tell us about your educational experience, your
21
formal education after high school.
22
23
24
25
Even before
After high school, I went to Cal Poly in San
Luis Obispo and graduated with a business degree.

Q
And after you got that or at the same time you
were getting your education, were you doing any law
Page: 659
enforcement or any type of enforcement work?
Yes.
What were you doing?
I was in the United States Coast Guard Reserve.
I was part of a boarding team.
federal law.
8
9
10
We were enforcing
What kind of tasks?

First of all, where were you stationed?
Stationed on patrol boats between Santa Barbara
and San Diego.
11
And what kind of work would you do?
12
We would do boat theft investigations.
We
13
would do drug enforcement -- drug enforcement
14
situations, and also we would do search-and-rescue
15
operations.
16
So before you ever even became a police
17
officer, you had experience doing all of those areas; is
18
that right?
19
Yes.
20
For how long?
21
That was for six years.
22
And in or around that time, toward the end of
23
the six years, you got sponsored to become a police
24
officer?
25
I did.
Page: 660
By who?
By the Lompoc Police Department.
What does it mean to be sponsored?
It means they pay for your way to go through
5
6
7
the academy.
Q
Is that different than somehow -- some other
police officers in how they come to be employed?
Yes.
How is it different?
10
Some people put them themselves through the
11
academy.
12
themselves through and pay their own way.
13
14
They don't have a job offer.
They put
But Lompoc basically said if you go through the
academy, we'll hire you?
15
Yes.
16
Where did you go to the academy at?
17
Here in Santa Maria.
18
Would that be at Allan Hancock Police Academy?
19
Yes.
20
Well-known academy here in the Central Coast;
21
right?
22
Yes.
23
And how long was the academy?
24
About five-and-a-half months.
25
You were trained in all the typical subjects
Page: 661
that police officers are when they go through the
academy; right?
Yes.
How to conduct investigations, how to arrest
people, what constitutes a violation of the penal code,
all of those different topics; right?
That's correct.
Did we lose our microphone again?
We did.
10
11
Yes.
for a moment.
12
13
14
record.
15
16
17
18
19
MR. MILLER:
Q
So you went through the academy.
What happened
after you completed it?

A
I started the training program with the Lompoc
Police Department.
20
21
there?
22
Yes.
23
Approximately what year was that?
24
1990.
25
And how long were you with the Lompoc Police
And then you became a full-time police officer
Page: 662
Department?
For six-and-a-half years.
How many different chiefs did you work under at
the Lompoc Police Department?
Three.
Do you remember the names of them?
Eibert, Chief Jenke, and Bill Brown, who's now
the Sheriff.
Just reelected yesterday; right?
10
I didn't know that.
11
12

watching television.
13
14
You must not have been
THE WITNESS:
I wasn't watching TV.
BY MR. MILLER:
15
But the Sheriff of Santa Barbara County; right?
16
Correct.
17
And during your time at Lompoc Police
18
Department, did you ever receive any discipline?
19
No, I did not.
20
And at some point you decided to leave the
21
department and come to Santa Maria; is that true?
22
Yes.
23
And approximately what year was that?
24
That was in '96.
25
And you came over to the City here, and how
Page: 663
long were you employed by the City?
16-and-a-half years.
And you started here as a police officer;
right?
Yes.
That was your rank?
Yes.
And then you got promoted?
I did.
10
What promotion was that?
11
To the rank of corporal.
12
And then what was your next promotion?
13
Rank of sergeant.
14
And then after that?
15
Rank of lieutenant.
16
And that's the position you held until you were
17
terminated?
18
Yes.
19
And how many chiefs did you work under at the
20
21
City of Santa Maria?

A
22
23
Three.
I'm sorry.
Excluding the interim chiefs for brief periods
24
or with the exception of Martin because there was one
25
that was like two days --
Page: 664
Four chiefs.
Okay.
And until this recent termination, you
were never disciplined; is that true?
That's true.
And were you promoted by chiefs other than
Chief Macagni?
To the rank of corporal, I was, yes.
Who was that by?
Chief Shiner.
10
And then Chief Macagni gave you the other
11
promotions; correct?
12
Yes.
13
Now, in addition to the years that you've had
14
in law enforcement, you've also had --
15
16
How long had
you been a lieutenant up until your termination?
17
THE WITNESS:
18
19
MR. MILLER:
20
Excuse me.
I think about five years.

Okay.
Thank you.
That was a good
question.
21
Approximately five years?
22
I'm estimating.
23
Okay.
And you also had some -- during the
24
course of your career here -- we'll get down to specific
25
dates and times -- but you had some specialty
Page: 665
assignments; right?
Yes, I did.
For example, one of those assignments was that
you handled internal affairs investigations?
Correct.
Now, in your experience, someone who handles
internal affairs investigations has to be able to keep
confidences; is that true?
Yes.
10
Because you're investigating other police
11
officers; right?
12
Yes, that's true.
13
In your experience, is that typically a
14
position that's assigned to someone who is trustworthy
15
and keeps those confidences?
16
Yes.
17
And you were one of the IA lieutenants; true?
18
True.
19
Was there any other at the time or near your
20
termination?
21
Lieutenant Norm Come.
22
Okay.
23
He was also one of the other individuals
who whistle-blew; right?
24
Yes.
25
Before we get too far into the facts, I just
Page: 666
want to cover a few more background training items.
Did you ever go to any specialty education
programs at your training, for example, POST school?
Did you ever go to POST school?
Yes.
And tell us about that.
7
8
9
What did you do in
that regard?
A
I went to homicide investigations.
sexual assault investigations school.
I went to
I went through
10
interview interrogation school.
11
supervisor's school.
12
sergeant schools, CSTI, which is a tactical school up in
13
San Luis Obispo.
14
lieutenant, I went through the supervisory manager's
15
course up in Marina Del Rey.
16
course.
17
school, schools like that.
18
I went through
I went through a couple different
I went through a -- when I made
That was a multi-month
Been through DUI school, drug investigation
And so throughout your career you continued to
19
try to further your education as a police officer; is
20
that true?
21
Yes.
22
And even though you've had some experience,
23
including the things dealing with tactics, at the time
24
of the Covarrubias shooting, which we're going to talk
25
about in just a minute, you had a commander; right?
Page: 667
Yes.
What was his name?
At the time, it was Commander Ritz.
And you have some familiarity with what his
background was; correct?
Correct.
Did he have more tactical training than you
Yes.
10
Tell us why -- tell us what you understand his
11
12
did?
station to be.
A
He was a SWAT team -- ex-SWAT team member, SWAT
13
team leader, and I believe he went to SWAT team tactical
14
leader school, or I'm not sure what they called it, but
15
it's designed for the leaders of the SWAT team.
16
went through the FBI academy and was the SWAT team
17
commander at one point.
18
One more thing just in terms of training
19
because it's going to come up here.
20
discussion about a stun gun.
21
22
And he
There's been some
You heard that; right?
Yes.
I'm sorry, do you mean
23
that he was the SWAT team commander in the Santa Maria
24
Police Department or somewhere else?
25
THE WITNESS:
In the Santa Maria Police

Page: 668
Department.
2
3
Thank you.
BY MR. MILLER:
Thank you.
There's been some discussion about the use of a
stun gun.
to do with training.
8
9
Okay.
I'm going to bring it up now because it has
There's a difference between stun guns and

tasers, based on your training; is that right?
10
Yes.
11
Tell us briefly what the difference is.
12
A taser is a device that you carry that has a
13
barb device on it.
14
trigger, and it shoots the barbs out, travels a distance
15
of about from me to you, and it electrocutes the person.
16
You can also take the -- the barbs out and use it in the
17
dry stun mode where you actually just apply it to the
18
body of a person and use it in that fashion.
19
It's on a wire, and you squeeze a
And at the time that you were with the City of
20
Santa Maria, did you ever receive any training in stun
21
guns?
22
Tasers, yes.
23
Tasers, yes.
24
right?
25
As well as on the dry stun mode;
Yes.
Page: 669
1
2
And, in fact, as part of that training, you
yourself had been stunned; is that true?
Yes.
That's something that's common at least in your
experience.
get trained on tasers, they actually get tased so they
know what it feels like?
Most police officers go through, when they
Yes.
In fact, sometimes you even videotape that
10
training; right?
11
Yes.
12
Now, you understand that your employment was
13
terminated by the City of Santa Maria, and at least in
14
part, it was due to your role in the Covarrubias
15
shooting; right?
16
Correct.
17
And the City contended that you had several
18
duties that somehow you were negligent at performing or
19
incompetent at performing; correct?
20
Yes.
21
I think it's very important that we get to this
22
part right away in terms of what your duties were and
23
when.
24
25
First, I'd like to show you an organizational

chart that I'll mark next in order.
Page: 670
1
2
So I believe your next in
order would be --
MS. BERNAL:
Now, is this -- this looks like very similar to
MR. MILLER:
in FF.
Would you like to reclaim
GG, and we'll call it FF?

MR. MILLER:
12
16
17
Thank you.
Sorry about that.
So you're withdrawing GG;
right?
14
15
We just didn't get
That's what the issue was.
11
13
Right.
Oh, it is FF.
I'm sorry.
9
10
GG.
what I have marked as FF.
7
8
GG.
MR. MILLER:
I am.
We just didn't put FF in
evidence, and that's what I'm here to do.

Q
Do you recognize that organizational chart,
Mr. Ast?
18
Yes.
19
Is that what the organizational chart in the
20
21
22
police department looked like prior to November of 2011?

A
Yes, it is.
MR. MILLER:
Okay.
23
exhibit into evidence.
24
MR. GONZALES:
25
And I would offer this
No objection.
All right.
Then FF is
Page: 671
received.
(Exhibit FF was received into evidence.)
Now, I do notice that on
the list that was provided to me, it says Police
Department Organization Chart as of 1/20/12.
MR. MILLER:
moved in, I thought.
MS. BERNAL:
That's a different one that we
No, the dates just -- I just have
the end date on it.
10
MR. MILLER:
11
12
I see.
So I'll go ahead and
change that to 11/11?
13
MR. MILLER:
Correct.
14
MS. BERNAL:
11/20/11.
15
The City might want to make that correction on
16
their exhibit list as well, the one supplied by counsel.
17
MR. GONZALES:
18
MR. MILLER:
19
20
21
22
23
We're doing so.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
And let's get into a little bit of background
because it's important.

We've heard a lot of discussion about the
24
claims that you had brought to the City, your
25
whistle-blower complaints, but you tried to relay
Page: 672
certain concerns that you had within the city to your
chief before ever doing that; is that right?
Yes, that's correct.
Did we lose our mic again?
(Brief interruption to repair microphone.)
record.
8
9
10
11
I think we have our technical difficulties

solved.
Go ahead.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
12
13

I'm going to start again just so that I can
stay focused here.
14
Prior to November of 2011, and prior to raising
15
your initial whistle-blower complaints up to the City's
16
upper management, did you try to go to the chief first?
17
Yes.
18
What kind of things were you telling the chief
19
that were going on in the department that you believed
20
were inappropriate?
21
Telling him that we shouldn't be using the
22
Office of Internal Affairs Investigations unequally for
23
people, that we should -- if we're going to give one --
24
put one person through an internal affairs
25
investigation, then we have to put other people who
Page: 673
commit similar violations through internal affairs
investigations.
So there was something happening -- well, first
of all, you knew this because you were the internal
affairs investigator; right?
Yes.
So you were being prompted by the chief to
investigate some individuals but not others?
Yes.
10
And you disagreed with that?
11
I did.
12
So some conduct that was basically the same
13
type of violation of policy, the chief would allow
14
certain people that he didn't like to be investigated
15
while other people that he did like would not be
16
investigated?
17
Yes.
18
And you found that that was inappropriate
He referred to it as his book of friends.
19
conduct for the chief to have in the City; is that
20
right?
21
Yes.
22
And the same was true with other kinds of
23
favoritism; right?
24
Yes.
25
And when you attempted to raise those issues to
Page: 674
Chief Macagni, was it well-received?
No.
Why not?
He was a dictator style of a leader.
Tell us what the reaction was.

So he
would tell you he doesn't want to hear about it and,
"Knock it off.
hear it anymore."
8
9
10
Quit talking about it.
I don't want to
That type of thing.
Was it your understanding that Jim Ginter and
Norm Come, two other lieutenants, also tried to raise

their complaints with Chief Macagni?
11
Yes.
12
Prior to November of 2011?
13
Yes.
14
And was he similarly unreceptive?
15
Yes.
16
Were you in meetings together where you jointly
17
tried to raise those complaints to the chief?
18
words, did you approach him sometimes in groups about
19
these issues?
20
In other
We would have discussions in Wednesday morning
21
staff meetings, and we also went up to an overnight
22
bring-together-the-group of all the lieutenants and
23
commanders and chief up in Shell Beach and had
24
discussions up there about how to bring the department
25
together and what was wrong with the agency.
Page: 675
1
2
And in those discussions, you voiced these
concerns that you had; is that true?
Yes.
And then you went on vacation; right?
Yes.
And when you got back, you found out something
had changed; is that true?
Correct.
What did you learn?
10
That the assignments had been redone and that
11
12
13
14
my take-home car was being pulled.

Q
And that was told to you through a memorandum;
is that right?
A
Yes.
15
16
MR. MILLER:
17
already in evidence.
18
19
It is.
I think it's H, isn't it?

Thank you.
And it's
Mr. Ast, I'm showing you Exhibit H.
Is that
the memo?
20
It is.
21
And tell us what your understanding of that
22
23
24
25
memo was.
A
It is a reassignment of lieutenant duties
within the agency.

Q
Including your duties?
Page: 676
Yes.
And did you have a meeting about that memo?
Yes, we did.
With Chief Macagni?
Yes.
Wherein it was explained to you what was going
to happen as a result of that memo?
Yes.
What did the chief tell you?
10
That I would be going to patrol, but being --
11
having oversight in charge of the detective bureau, but
12
what it meant by "oversight" is that I would just be in
13
charge of doing three annual evaluations of my
14
sergeants.
15
16
I was trying to see the memo at the same time.

Q
Okay.
So effectively, what the chief said is
17
you're no longer going to work active detective
18
investigations or supervise them; is that true?
19
Correct.
20
That you're still going to somehow have to
21
figure out how to perform these guys' evaluations;
22
right?
23
Yes.
24
But you're not going to be able to evaluate
25
them to do that?
Page: 677
Correct.
And, "Oh, by the way, I'm going to take your
car away too"; right?
Yes.
Why did you have a car as somebody who was
previously overseeing the detectives?
Because I was coming out to after-hour calls.
So you could get called out at 2:00 in the
morning if there was a criminal investigation going on?
10
True.
11
And that's why the city provided you with a car
12
13
in the first instance?

A
14
Yes.
I'm sorry.
The record is
15
not clear.
16
sergeants were that he was being asked to evaluate.
At least I'm not clear on who the -- who the
17
MR. MILLER:
18
19
jobs, what division were they in or --
20
BY MR. MILLER:
21
22
23
Sure.
That will be helpful.

I mean, what were their
What sergeants were you still going to be asked
to evaluate?
A
The detective bureau sergeant, the narcotics
24
suppression team sergeant, and the gang suppression team
25
sergeant.
Page: 678
1
2
Okay.
BY MR. MILLER:
Let's talk about some important distinctions as
to why we know your active duties were removed.
Number one, what would you wear to work every day prior
to November of 2011?
Okay.
Basically dressed like I am right here.
Okay.
Like a detective.
10
A sport coat, a tie potentially; right?
11
Right.
12
And you would work within the detective bureau;
13
Dressed like a detective; right?
is that true?
14
Correct.
15
After this November 2011 memo, you get moved to
16
patrol?
17
Well, I was actually working in the internal
18
affairs investigation office.
19
detective bureau.
20
21
I'm sorry.
I think you said
The internal affairs investigation
unit?
22
Right.
23
But still at that time, you were dealing with
24
25
the detectives on a day-to-day basis?

A
Page: 679
1
2
All right.
Does your uniform change after
November of 2011?
Yes.
What do you have to wear to work every day
after November 2011?
A patrol uniform.
Okay.
Because I was working patrol.
No longer being called out on a day-to-day
10
Why was that?
basis for criminal investigations?
11
Correct.
12
And in fact -- well, let me take it another
13
step back.
14
Sorry to jump ahead here.
Prior to November of 2011, what shift were you
15
working?
16
shift?
17
Yeah -- yes, I was working days.
18
And you were able to supervise your fellow
19
In other words, were you working the day
detectives, who were also working days; is that true?
20
Yes.
21
But after November of 2011, in December of
22
2011, your shift changed; right?
23
Yes.
24
What shift were you working then?
25
Working what we call the p.m. shift, which is
Page: 680
1
2
4:30 in the afternoon 'til 2:30 in the morning.

Q
So somehow the chief was going to expect you to
still evaluate the gentlemen who were working on the day
shift, but he had decided all of a sudden you're going
to work on this p.m. shift; is that right?
Correct.
And typically, you could go out in the field
and evaluate detectives by using the car they provided,
but that was no longer going to be available to you
10
either; right?
11
Correct.
12
Was that affecting your ability to complete
13
that job?
14
I had another car that I was able to use.
15
But in general, this was affecting some ability
16
17
18
for you to do your job; is that right?

A
Yes.
MR. GONZALES:
Excuse me.
I'm going to have --
19
I just want to make sure the record is clear.
20
having a continuing objection as to relevance as to this
21
line of questioning, referring to going back to
22
Macagni's era and this particular set of circumstances.
23
I made that objection earlier.
24
25

objection.
And same ruling.
I'm
You can have a continuing

I'm allowing it.
Page: 681
Go ahead.
MR. GONZALES:
MR. MILLER:
Of course.
Thank you.
And so it's been called into doubt -- you've
heard in this hearing it's been called into doubt
whether or not you had the active day-to-day
investigation responsibilities or duty over these
detectives.
Correct.
10
But we know that you didn't have that
11
You've heard it; right?
responsibility; right?
12
Yes.
13
Because a month prior to the Covarrubias
14
shooting, maybe five weeks prior, in December of 2011,
15
there's another shooting; right?
16
Yes.
17
The Agnes Street shooting; correct?
18
That's correct.
19
And did you have any involvement in that
20
criminal investigation?
21
No, I did not.
22
Did you have any involvement in that shooting?
23
No.
24
Who did?
25
Did Commander Ritz?
Page: 682
Commander Ritz did.
Did he oversee that shooting?
He did.
And that's exactly what you said happened,
which is the following:
yourself, Jim Ginter, and Norm Come got taken out of
your secondary support positions and moved over into
patrol; is that right?
After November of 2011,
Yes.
10
And you got the car taken away; is that right?
11
Yes.
12
And if you were working active criminal
13
investigations as of December of 2011, you would have
14
had to go out and be part of that Agnes Street
15
investigation; right?
16
Probably, yes.
17
And you could have gotten called out at
18
nighttime, or if you were working days, you would have
19
-- or even on your day off, you could have been subject
20
to be called; right?
21
Correct.
22
But none of those were true, were they?
23
No.
24
25
Okay.
Here's what I want
to know about the organization of the department that's
Page: 683
not clear to me.
There have been three terms used here, and I
don't understand how they fit on the organizational
chart.
the detective bureau.
affairs unit.
One is criminal investigations.
And the third is the internal
MR. MILLER:
The other is
Great.
If that could be
explained to me, I would appreciate it, through the
10
testimony of a witness.
11
witness, but at some point I'd like to understand that.
12
MR. MILLER:
It doesn't have to be this
This is as good a witness as any.
13
Let's take it step by step, and let me walk you back in
14
the timeline.
15
16
your supervisor; right?
17
18
19
Before November of 2011, Commander Ritz was
In other words, just prior to November of 2011,

Commander Ritz was over top of you; correct?
A
I thought he and Commander Green switched a
20
little bit later.
21
that time, they switched.
22
23
Okay.
Maybe it was around that -- around
But -- so basically by November of 2011,
Commander Ritz becomes over top of you; right?
24
Yes, I believe so.
25
And underneath that, just prior to this memo,
Page: 684
you were a lieutenant; correct?
Yes.
And you also had, as a secondary assignment,
criminal investigations; true?
Correct.
And in particular, you were doing internal
affairs investigations as part of those
responsibilities; right?
Yes.
10
So I don't know if that's clear, but you
11
basically had oversight on a day-to-day basis of
12
criminal investigations; correct?
13
Correct.
14
And you also, on a day-to-day basis, would do
15
internal affairs investigations; true?
16
Yes.
17
Okay.
18
19
20
21
And where is that shown
on this chart?
MR. MILLER:
moved out.
The chart that was showing it got
Let me see if I can try to show you.
22
The chart moved.
23
24
same one as the one up there?
25
MS. BERNAL:
It's animated.
Oh, so this isn't the
Exhibit FF.
Page: 685
1
2
MR. MILLER:
If we look at FF, it will be
easier, because that's the same one.
I was looking at the same
packet that you had given me yesterday so I wouldn't
have to turn around in my chair.
6
7
MR. MILLER:
This one has it, before the
animation.
8
9
All right.

clarifies it.
Thank you.
Okay.
Well, this
No wonder I couldn't figure
10
it out, because the piece of paper I was looking at had
11
that whole section whited out.
12
13
14
MR. MILLER:
Well, it's worth clarifying for
the record, so I appreciate it.

Q
So on a day-to-day basis, before November of
15
2011, you would, for example, work alongside with the
16
sergeant who was doing gang suppression; right?
17
Yes.
18
And you would, for example, work alongside a
19
sergeant who was the detective sergeant?
20
Yes.
21
And in this case, that would have been Van
22
Meel; right?
23
The detective sergeant was Terry Flaa.
24
Excuse me, Terry Flaa.
25
Pardon me.
Thank you.
I also get them confused.
Page: 686
But after this "realignment," that active
day-to-day supervision duty changed per the chief;
right?
Yes.
That was his order; correct?
Yes.
And so the reason that you don't go out to the
Agnes Street shooting just a month later or even
participate in the criminal investigation at all is
10
because now those sergeants are to report directly to
11
Commander Ritz, right here, as the commander; right?
12
13
Yes.
MR. MILLER:
And at some point we're going to
14
probably have to excuse the room.
15
now, but I want to come back to why we know his
16
involvement in that was important.
17
18
19
I don't want to do it
Can you make a note of that?

Q
All right.
And so after November of 2011, you
have a different uniform; correct?
20
Yes.
21
And sometime in December, you end up having to
22
work the p.m. shift?
23
Yes.
24
Okay.
25
And you're no longer dealing with these
investigations on a day-to-day basis?
Page: 687
Correct.
All per Chief Macagni?
Right.
And so in this case, you were trying to be held
responsible, per Chief Martin, in Covarrubias, for
duties that were taken away from you by Chief Macagni in
November of 2011; is that a fair statement?
That's fair.
Okay.
And you feel that those duties were
10
taken away from you in the first instance for
11
retaliation; is that true?
12
Yes, that's true.
13
And so now you're getting retaliated against
14
twice.
You're being held to a standard and duty that
15
you didn't have because it was taken away from you as
16
retaliation in a first instance; right?
17
MR. GONZALES:
I have to object.
This has been
18
leading for a while.
19
but this is almost like having counsel testify.
20
I know we've both been leading,
You both have been
21
leading, and I have not sua sponte objected, but now
22
that someone has objected, I would ask that to the
23
extent possible that you refrain from -- I know you're
24
trying to move quickly, but --
25
MR. MILLER:
I am.
And I haven't objected to

Page: 688
him for that same basis.
MR. MILLER:
I certainly know a leading
question when I see one.
it along.
All right.
I thought our goal was to move
Mr. Ast, let me pick up my train of thought.
Thank you.
Mr. Ast, do you feel that basically as a result
-- let me take it a step back.
10
11
Do you feel that the termination decision is

again a further retaliation?
12
Yes.
13
Based on the prior retaliation of taking away
14
the duties in the first instance?
15
Yes.
16
So that by the time we get here to January
17
16th, 2012, or excuse me, January 28th, 2012, the
18
Covarrubias shooting, at that point, just for the
19
clarity of the record, you no longer had active
20
day-to-day oversight of criminal investigations?
21
That's true.
22
And so you were asked a series of questions by
23
Mr. Gonzales about those duties.
24
Why didn't you do that?
25
Why did you do this?
Why didn't you do those things that
Page: 689
Mr. Gonzales asked you?
or not your duty?
Was it because it was your duty
It was not my duty.
Whose duty was it?
Commander Ritz.
Let's talk about the Covarrubias shooting.
want to go through those details, and then we'll come
back to some other issues.
9
10
Your first contact from anyone about the

investigation into Albert Covarrubias was when?
11
On January 26th.
12
And that was when Paul Van Meel approached you?
13
Yes.
14
What did Paul say to you?
15
Paul said to me that he wanted to know when
16
something rises to the level of needing to report it as
17
a mandated reporter.
18
asking the question, then it's risen to that level.
19
20
21
And I told him if you are even
What does it mean to be a mandated reporter as
far as you understand it?

A
It means you have an obligation under the penal
22
code for child abuse cases or for child neglect,
23
including sexual assault, that if you have reasonable
24
suspicion that it's occurring, you're mandated to report
25
it by law, or it's a misdemeanor violation.
Page: 690
right?
Yes, or Child Welfare Services.
Can you speak into the mic?
Or Child Welfare Services.
6
7
8
Mandated to report it to law enforcement;
I'm sorry.
But you're mandated
to report it.
Q
And then if you are in law enforcement, you
have an obligation to report it as well?
Yes.
10
To who?
11
To the district attorney's office.
12
Do you have any discretion in that regard?
13
No, you don't.
14
It's a "you shall report it to the district
15
attorney's office"; correct?
16
Correct.
17
And so when Mr. Van Meel comes to you on
18
January 26 of 2012 and asks you if he thinks -- or
19
excuse me -- if you think he should report it, your
20
response is, "If you have to ask the question, you
21
already have enough.
You should report it"; right?
22
Correct.
23
Do you make sure that he does so?
24
Yes.
25
To who?
Page: 691
Commander Ritz.
Commander Ritz.
Did you go with him to make
sure that that was done?
Yes, I did.
Did you wait five days to do so?
No.
Did you wait three days to do so?
No.
Did you wait five hours to do so?
10
No.
11
When did you do so?
12
I did it immediately upon hearing it.
13
So your next move, immediately upon hearing
14
this issue, is to go to Commander Ritz and make sure it
15
was reported; right?
16
Yes.
17
And you went with him and sat in that meeting;
18
true?
19
True.
20
And Paul Van Meel recalled and recounted to
21
Commander Ritz exactly what he had told you; right?
22
Yes.
23
At that point, on January 26, 2012, what time
24
25
was this, approximately?

A
It was about 4:30 in the afternoon.
Page: 692
And after you sat down with Commander Ritz, was
there anything that you knew from Mr. Van Meel that
Commander Ritz did not?
No.
He had the same equal information at that point
in time?
Yes.
Did you feel that he was as informed as he
could be based on the knowledge that you had?
10
Yes.
11
What else happened in that discussion?
12
What
else was talked about?
13
We talked about an investigation being
14
conducted, how to conduct it, what direction to go in,
15
administrative inquiry versus criminal investigation.
16
We talked about things like that.
17
And --
18
Strategy.
19
And did Craig Ritz -- excuse me -- Commander
20
Ritz, give the ultimate instruction on what was to be
21
done?
22
Yes.
23
What did he decide needed to be done?
24
That there would be a criminal investigation
25
conducted by our agency.
Page: 693
And who was assigned that investigation?
No.
Who did he assign it to?
To Paul Van Meel.
And that would be consistent with the
reorganization that had just happened a few months
earlier?
Yes.
Did he assign you any role in that
10
You?
investigation or any specific task?
11
No.
12
Now, we heard a question about whether or not
13
anyone knew about Jane Doe's name; right?
14
Yes.
15
Did Mr. Van Meel know Jane Doe's name at the
16
time he had the meeting with Commander Ritz on January
17
26th?
18
No, he did not.
19
Did Commander Ritz know the name at that time?
20
No.
21
Did you know the name at that time?
22
No.
23
Was there a need to get that name?
24
Yes, there was.
25
Did Commander Ritz seek your assistance in that
Page: 694
regard?
Yes.
He tasked you with just trying to get the name;
4
5
6
7
is that right?
A
Yes.
Well, I volunteered that I could help out
and get that, and he said, "Okay.

Q
That would be good."
Now, you were asked by Mr. Gonzales about a
series of other individuals who you could have
approached to get that name.
10
who you got the name from.
And let's start off with

Who did you get it from?
11
I got it from Lieutenant Rico Flores.
12
Okay.
Well, one of the other individuals that
13
he suggested you could have gotten the name from was the
14
head of the Explorer Scouts; right?
Mr. Herrick?
15
The ex-head of the Explorer Scouts.
16
Ex.
17
18
So he was the ex-head of the Explorer
Scouts as of January 28th, 2012?

A
Yes, I believe so.
I don't think he was the
19
Explorer Scout person anymore.
20
duties.
21
22
25
He wasn't working there.

MR. GONZALES:
Can you bring that mic a little
bit closer again?
23
24
He had passed off the
THE WITNESS:
Sure.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
He wasn't handling the day-to-day oversight of
Page: 695
the Explorer Scouts anymore?
No, he wasn't.
Was he retired from those duties, or was he
retired in general?
He was either retired or he was working out at
the airport and had some medical problems, and so he had
backed away from that assignment.
8
9
So did you think he would be a good choice
since he wasn't there on a day-to-day basis?
10
No.
11
Now, another individual you were asked if you
12
could get the name from was Mr. Huffman.
13
that?
Do you recall
14
Yes.
15
And for the hearing officer's benefit, who is
16
Mr. Huffman?
17
He's a detective.
18
Okay.
And did you know at the time of the
19
January 26th -- or excuse me, January -- yeah, 26th,
20
2012 meeting that Mr. Huffman knew the identity of the
21
girl?
22
No.
23
Did you know that he was the one who had
24
25
reported it to Van Meel?

A
Yes.
Page: 696
Okay.
But you also understood from Van Meel in
that meeting that Mr. Huffman -- or excuse me -- that
Mr. Van Meel was having difficulty getting the name of
the Jane Doe?
Yes.
So did you believe they'd already tried to do
so from Mr. Huffman since that's who told him?
Yes.
And you thought he was unsuccessful in doing
11
Yes.
12
So did that rule out going back to Mr. Huffman
10
13
so?
at least as far as you were concerned?
14
Yes.
15
You were asked at some point why you didn't get
16
it from Paul Van Meel or Mr. Flaa.
17
those potential alternatives that were expressed to you?
Do you remember
18
Yes.
19
Well, Mr. Van Meel didn't have the name as of
20
January 26th, 2012, did he?
21
No.
22
And to your knowledge, neither did Mr. Flaa;
23
24
25
correct?
A
Correct.
MR. GONZALES:
Again, I know that I did my

Page: 697
share of leading, but this is almost having him testify.
And I'm going to ask that -- you can just ask the
question of what he knows.
MR. MILLER:
whether or not Mr. Flaa knew.
MR. MILLER:
MR. MILLER:
I'm not -Just say do you know
Sure.
It's just a --
I can rephrase it.
I just find it
10
ironic that we sat here and listened to leading
11
questions for three days.
12
13

objected.
14
15
16
But no one
So -MR. MILLER:
Okay.
Okay.
To your knowledge, did Mr. Van Meel have the
name on January 26th, 2012?
17
No, he did not.
18
Did Mr. Flaa?
19
No.
20
Did they get that name later in time?
21
Yes.
22
When do you understand that either Mr. Flaa or
23
Mr. Van Meel got the name?
24
It was on January 27th.
25
The same day that you got the name?
Page: 698
Yes.
So was the suggestion that you could have gone
to them on the 26th a valid one?
5
6
No, I don't believe so.

MR. GONZALES:
Misstatement of the evidence.
remember asking about the 27th, about the time.
All right.
look for that when I read the record.
BY MR. MILLER:
10
Well, I'll
One of the other suggestions that was made was
11
that you could have gone to an in-service sheet.
12
you go to an in-service sheet?
Did
13
I don't even know what that is.
14
You still don't know what that is as of today;
15
right?
16
No, I don't.
17
And so effectively, out of all the options that
18
were expressed to you, which one, again, did you choose,
19
just for the sake of clarity?
20
Going to Lieutenant Flores.
21
Now, you were asked by Mr. Gonzales why you did
22
23
that.
Why was it?

A
Because he was the ranking person in charge of
24
what was going on at the -- for the DUI checkpoint.
25
He's a lieutenant, and I expected that I could go to him
Page: 699
and he would keep things confidential.
2
3
Now, you did have issues with Mr. Flores in the
past; right?
Correct.
Did you still expect him to do his job on that
occasion?
Yes.
Was it reasonable for you to expect that a
9
10
lieutenant should be able to keep an investigation or

any type of request for information confidential?
11
Yes.
12
Were you working in a department where you had
13
to be afraid that that was going to be the case on a
14
day-to-day basis, that people were going to keep things
15
confidential?
16
Yes.
17
Did that make it difficult for you to do your
19
Yes.
20
Why did you end up going to Mr. Flores then?
21
Because I had to pick someone to go to, and he
18
job?
22
is a lieutenant, and I figured I would let the past be
23
the past, and that he could come through and do what he
24
was asked to do.
25
Was it for any deviant motive?
Page: 700
No, it was not.
Was it for any jealousy?
No.
Was it about money?
No.
After you asked Mr. Flores for the list, you
mentioned that Mr. Green came in; right?
Yes.
He's also a commander; right?
10
He is.
11
And just to acclimate the hearing officer, is
12
he the commander who is above Mr. Flores?
13
oversight of Mr. Flores?
14
I'm trying to think.
15
Yes.
16
I believe he did.
17
And what happens next?
Did he have
At that time?
In other words, what
18
happens in the conversation you had with Commander
19
Green?
20
With Commander Green?
21
Yeah.
22
He came into the office, closed the door, sat
23
down, and asked me what I was looking for into the
24
Explorers, why did I need a roster.
25
Did you tell him any confidential information
Page: 701
that you had learned?
No.
Did you tell Mr. Flores, when you asked him for
4
5
the roster, any confidential that you had learned?

A
No.
I'm sorry, is the roster
the schedule, or is it just the list of all the Explorer
Scouts?
THE WITNESS:
It's the list of everybody who's
10
working the DUI checkpoint that evening, including
11
officers.
12
Okay.
So was everyone --
13
when you say "the roster," that means just the list of
14
everybody who was working the checkpoint on that
15
particular occasion?
16
THE WITNESS:
17
18
Go ahead.
19
MR. MILLER:
20
21
Correct.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So the only information that you got from
Mr. Flores was just the roster; right?
22
Yes.
23
There was nothing confidential about that, was
24
there?
25
No.
Page: 702
You never dis -- did you ever disclose any
confidential details that had been told to you by Paul
Van Meel?
No.
Did you ever disclose to Mr. Flores any
confidential details that had been told to you by
Commander Ritz?
No.
After you had this discussion with Commander
10
Green, where you expressed some frustration -- right?
11
Yes, I did.
12
Did you have any other interaction with
13
14
15
16
Mr. Flores on that time period of January 27, 2012?

A
January 27th?
I don't think I had any contact
with him.
Q
No.
In other words, isn't that the contact --
17
isn't that the date we're talking about, January 27th of
18
2012, when you got the list?
19
Oh, I'm sorry.
20
Okay.
21
Yes, he came -- he came back into my office.
22
And what happened next between you and
23
Mr. Flores?
24
25
Yes.
He told me that he had the roster.
to make a copy of the roster.
He offered
I told him that would be

Page: 703
okay, just I needed to see it.
I started writing down the name of a female
that was on the roster.
Apparently there were two, but I only saw one.
I only saw one name.
I noticed that he was leaning over my shoulder,
so I was writing in my style that only I can read.
I wrote down three or four different names and then
passed him the roster back, and that was it.
10
names?
11
12
one person.
13
14
discussion?
15
And
Why did you write down three or four different
So that he wouldn't realize I was centering on
Did you say anything else to Mr. Flores in that
Yes, I asked him again, reminded him to keep it
16
confidential, and not let anybody know what I asked of
17
him.
18
Did he respond?
19
He said okay.
20
I'm sorry.
Were you
21
saying there was only one female name on the list or
22
two?
23
24
25
THE WITNESS:
Well, apparently there were two I
learned after the fact, but I only saw one.

Okay.
Go ahead.
Page: 704
BY MR. MILLER:
Did you happen to get the right one?
I did.
Okay.
So just to refresh, you say to
Mr. Flores, "Please keep it confidential," for the
second time; right?
Yes.
Does he agree?
Yes, he does.
10
Did Mr. Flores tell you at that time that he
11
had already tipped off the Explorer Scouts -- or excuse
12
me -- the officers in traffic?
13
No, he did not.
14
Including Mr. Covarrubias?
15
No, he did not.
16
Did you come to learn that after the fact?
17
Yes.
18
Did that bother you?
19
Yes, it did.
20
Why?
21
Because I asked him to keep it confidential,
22
and it didn't last probably 15, 20 minutes before it was
23
blabbed to his whole unit.
24
25
You weren't operating with that information at
the time, were you?
Page: 705
No.
That he had gone to his whole unit; right?
Right.
Who's the only person you knew he went to at
that time?
Commander Green.
When you came to learn after the fact that Rico
Flores had told all the traffic officers, including
Mr. Covarrubias, did you attribute any -- any fault to
10
him in terms of how the results turned out that evening?
11
Yes.
12
What issues did you attribute to him?
13
That it put the investigation on a path that we
14
had to rush everything so that we can get our criminal
15
evidence and we didn't lose the investigation, and it
16
put us on the fast track that we didn't need to be on.
17
To your knowledge, was Mr. Flores terminated --
18
No, he wasn't.
19
-- for his role in this shooting?
20
No.
21
Did you ever leak any confidential information
22
to anyone in this shooting?
23
No.
24
After you have this conversation with
25
Mr. Flores, what happens next?
What's the next

Page: 706
interaction relative to the Covarrubias matter?
I believe it was around 9 o'clock that night.
Let me stop you there because you already
testified.
track.
I just want to make sure we're on the same
Did you talk to Mr. Van Meel again?
Yes, I did.
When did that occur?
Oh, I'm sorry.
I took him a copy.
I took him
10
the list, a copy of the roster.
11
meeting with Commander Green and Lieutenant Flores.
12
13
All right.
That occurred after my
And that's when you had the
conversation you testified to previously.
14
Was it your understanding that Mr. Van Meel
15
knew the Jane Doe's name for hours earlier during the
16
day?
17
I didn't know it was for hours.
I thought that
18
he just got the name about the same time I was getting
19
the name.
20
That's what he told you?
21
Yes.
22
And after you get the name, there's a period of
23
time -- or is there a period of time in which you have
24
no involvement in what the investigators are doing?
25
Yes.
Page: 707
How long is that period of time?
Until about 9 o'clock at night.
Well, maybe --
maybe -- I'm sorry.
came back in -- had a discussion with me, but I'm not
sure of the time frame.
I'm not sure of the time.
They
Who came back and had a discussion with you?
Lieutenant -- or Sergeant Flaa and Sergeant Van
Meel.
Where did that discussion take place?
10
At the station.
11
And what discussion did they have with you?
12
They told me that -- I'm getting crisscrossed
13
on my -- on my people who were discussing things.
14
They came back to the station, and they told me
15
that they had an interview with the victim, that they
16
were able to pull her off of the DUI checkpoint line
17
successfully, using a ruse, got her back to the house,
18
spent about three hours interviewing her.
19
an hour, she started opening up about what actually
20
occurred, and it was sexual in nature, with sexual
21
intercourse occurring on multiple occasions and in
22
multiple locations.
23
24
25
After about
And that's generally basically it.
Did you wait several hours to call Commander
Ritz after that?

A
No, I didn't.
Page: 708
Did you wait even an hour?
This is later on than 9 o'clock then because --
when they came back.
probably closer to midnight.
I was off on my time.
It was
Does that refresh your memory?
It does.
So is there a gap in time between when you talk
to Paul Van Meel around 5:00, 5:30 on the 27th, and when
he comes back to the station with Terry Flaa?
10
Yes.
11
Approximately, in your best estimate, how long
12
is that gap?
13
About six hours.
14
What duties are you doing during that time
15
frame?
16
My regular patrol duties.
17
What are those duties?
18
In charge of the station, in charge of what's
19
going on out in the field, scheduling, reviewing
20
reports, keeping up my day-to-day activities.
21
As a watch commander?
22
As a watch commander.
23
And that's what you're doing during this
24
25
five-hour gap; is that true?

A
Yes.
Page: 709
1
2
And so after these two gentlemen come back to
the station, you call Commander Ritz; right?
Yes.
And again, approximately how long after you
talk to Mr. Flaa and/or Mr. Van Meel do you call
Commander Ritz?
7
8
I called him right way because they had -- they
were going out to do a cold call at the house.
Okay.
10
And I called him and told him that they were
11
en route to do a cold call at the house, and he said
12
okay and he would come to the station.
13
he come to the station.
14
I requested that
Did you call Commander Ritz in time for him to
15
stop the two detectives from doing the cold call if he
16
felt that was inappropriate?
17
Yes.
18
So if Commander Ritz felt a cold call was
19
inappropriate, there was time for him to deviate from
20
what the detectives were going to do?
21
Yes.
22
Do you know whether Commander Ritz ever
23
deviated from that plan?
24
He never did.
25
Now, you were asked earlier whether Commander
Page: 710
Ritz was out sick that day; correct?
Yes.
Did you come to learn anything after the fact
regarding what Commander Ritz might have been doing that
evening before he came back into work?
Yes.
What was he doing?
He went out with a sheriff and his wife for
dinner, with his wife.
10
Sound like he was sick?
11
It didn't sound like he was sick.
12
But nevertheless, when you called him around
13
midnight, did he come back in?
14
He did.
15
Quickly?
16
Yes.
17
Approximately how long did it take?
18
12 to 15 minutes.
19
And what's your next contact, if any, with Flaa
20
Somewhere in there.
and/or Mr. Van Meel?
21
Strike that.
22
What's the next interaction you have, if any,
23
24
25
Let me take it a step back.
in the Covarrubias matter?

A
Commander Ritz arrived at the station, and we
were in the detective bureau, me and -- myself and
Page: 711
Commander Ritz and Alfredo Ruiz.
him.
going on.
phone rang.
And I was updating
Alfredo was updating him on everything that was

And then the phone rang.
Let me stop you right there.
Alfredo Ruiz's
This is still
prior to the Covarrubias shooting; right?
Correct.
Is this prior to anyone going out there to
arrest him?
10
Yes.
11
After you finished and -- strike that.
12
13
Did you tell Commander Ritz everything you

knew?
14
Yes.
15
And after you told him everything you knew at
16
the time, there was nothing that you knew of a
17
confidential nature relative to the Covarrubias matter
18
that you understood Commander Ritz did not know?
19
Correct.
20
And so what happens after this call comes in
21
22
from or through Mr. Ruiz?

A
What call was that?
It was a call that said that they had a
23
successful cold call in to Jane Doe, that they had the
24
evidence of criminal activity, that -- that he said that
25
he wasn't going to go to jail or go to prison, that he
Page: 712
went suicidal on the phone, and that he disconnected the
phone.
I want to stop you there again for a second.
He being Albert Covarrubias?
Correct.
Tell me how this exchange is occurring.
In
other words, you're in the office with Mr. Ruiz and
Commander Ritz; right?
Right.
10
Mr. Ruiz, is he on the phone?
11
He is.
12
Who is he talking to to your knowledge?
13
He is talking to, I believe, Terry Flaa.
14
Okay.
15
At the victim's house.
16
With the victim?
17
With the victim.
18
What's the victim doing to your knowledge?
19
She's on the phone with Albert Covarrubias.
20
So this is like when we were kids and we played
21
Terry Flaa is where?
telephone; true?
22
Right.
23
So to your knowledge, is the victim talking
24
25
with Albert Covarrubias?

A
Yes.
Page: 713
As part of a pretext call?
Yes.
All right.
listening to the call on the police end?
Terry Flaa.
Okay.
And then the -- and then who is
And then what's he doing to your
knowledge?
He's relaying the information to Alfredo Ruiz.
And Alfredo Ruiz is in the room with you?
10
Yes, he's relaying the information to myself
11
and to Commander Ritz.
12
So both of you were in the room?
13
Yes.
14
There was no time that you were in the room
15
that Commander Ritz wasn't?
16
Right.
17
So you both hear the same information?
18
Yes.
19
Did you ever hear that there was a conditional
20
threat of suicide?
21
No.
22
If you do A, I will do B?
23
No.
24
And ultimately, based on what you knew,
25
Mr. Covarrubias was going to have to be arrested at some
Page: 714
point; right?
Yes.
So this threat of suicide, did you think it was
going to just stop?
No.
Okay.
Does the sergeant say anything to you
through that call after the phone is hung up by
Covarrubias?
9
10
He said, "You have to go get him now.
You have
to get him now."
11
Who says that?
12
The man on the other end of the phone talking
13
to Alfredo Ruiz.
14
"You have to get him now.
15
I believe it was Terry Flaa.
He says,
So again, you're on the phone, or you're in the
16
office, and Ruiz is on the phone.
17
and Commander Ritz, "Hey, Terry Flaa says we have to go
18
get him now"?
19
Does Ruiz say to you
He was just repeating what he was saying, so he
20
just said, "You have to go get him now."
21
who said it.
22
now."
He didn't say
He just said, "You have to go get him
23
What did you understand that to mean?
24
That it was an emergency situation.
25
That Mr. Covarrubias was going to kill himself?
Page: 715
Yes.
Based on thinking that he was going to be
arrested for raping a minor?
Yes.
Did that create exigent circumstance in your
mind?
It did.
Was that a difficult situation to deal with as
9
10
11
a police officer?
A
Yes.
Never had to deal with anything like that
before.
12
With respect to an officer?
13
Correct.
14
Who was armed in the field; right?
15
Right.
16
Threatening to commit suicide?
17
True.
18
Did you think you had a limited window to act?
19
Yes.
20
In order to do what?
21
A limited window to act
in order to do what, to kill him?
22
To save his life.
23
Were you trying to kill him that night?
24
No.
25
Did you think Commander Ritz was trying to kill
Page: 716
him that night?
No.
Did you get the sense that anyone was trying to
kill Albert Covarrubias that evening?
No.
What was the goal?
To get him into custody peacefully, unharmed.
To himself; correct?
Correct.
10
Were you concerned he might harm anyone else?
11
Yes, I was.
12
You have some experience with people that are
13
mentally unbalanced in your job; right?
14
Yes.
15
Have you ever seen them do egregious things?
16
Yes.
17
Such as?
18
Well, I've worked detectives for quite
Can you give us some examples?
19
sometime, so I've seen multiple murders.
20
people that have mutilated themselves.
21
that have battered people and, you know, felony
22
battery-type cases.
23
out into traffic in front of cars.
24
of things over the years.
25
I've seen
I've seen people
I've seen people that have walked

I've seen all kinds
And so in this case, you did have concerns that
Page: 717
Mr. Covarrubias could injure himself; right?
Yes.
Were you worried that he would injure anyone
else?
Yes.
Why were you worried about that?
His wife committed suicide about a year
earlier, and there was always some uneasy feeling within
our agency that maybe she didn't actually commit
10
suicide, that it was something other than that.
11
I was concerned that maybe there was some truth to that
12
and that he was capable of killing somebody else.
13
worried about homicide.
14
15
And so
I was
And then you came to understand that
Mr. Covarrubias was actually recently married; right?
16
Yes.
17
But you also were charged with knowledge at the
18
time that he was raping a minor at the same time as he
19
had just gotten married?
20
Yes.
21
And you mentioned he was armed; right?
22
He was.
23
And how long was it going to be until he was
24
not only going to be armed, but mobile, approximately,
25
in your opinion?
Page: 718
From what time to what time?
From the time you found out, "We got to go get
him now"?
Within probably 20 minutes.
What was going to happen in approximately 20
minutes?
motorcycle.
10
11
He was going to be on the road in a car or on a
Was he just going to have his service weapon,
or was he going to have any other weapons?

A
He was on his motorcycle.
He had an automatic
12
rifle and a shotgun.
13
have whatever was in the car with him.
14
And if he was in a car, he would
Once a suspect becomes mobile, in your
15
experience is it more difficult to take them into
16
custody?
17
Yes.
18
Did you have any expectation that he was going
19
to come back to the station and say, "Hi guys, I'm here.
20
Just go ahead and arrest me"?
21
No.
22
Or that -- what was your expectation if he
23
would have come back to the station and you tried to
24
take him into custody?
25
MR. GONZALES:
Speculation.
Page: 719
MR. MILLER:
He was asked.
Well, I guess in the
sense that there's been a lot of talk about, you know,
considering various options and so on and so forth, I
think it's relevant if it's something that was under
consideration.
it's not as relevant, rather than if he were thinking of
it at the time of these events.
MR. MILLER:
10
clarify it.
11
12
If it's something he's thinking of now
That's a very fair point.
Let me
At the time of the event, did you have any
concerns about his coming back to the station?
13
Yes.
14
What were those concerns?
15
That if he got back to the station and we tried
16
to take him into custody there, that he can kill himself
17
or kill others.
18
19
So a decision is made to go and arrest him in
the field; is that right?
20
That's correct.
21
Is that your decision?
22
No.
23
Whose decision was it?
24
Commander Ritz.
25
Were you present when he made that decision?
Page: 720
I was.
Who else was present?
Alfredo Ruiz.
Was there a discussion about how the arrest was
to be made?
Yes.
A plan if you will; right?
Yes.
Who made the plan?
10
It was a multitude of people that were
11
injecting ideas, coming up with things, changing things.
12
13
Everyone trying to bring their experience to
bear?
14
Yes.
15
Who ultimately approved the plan?
16
Commander Ritz.
17
And what was that ultimate plan that was
18
19
approved?
A
Well, with Commander Ritz, the plan was that
20
two sergeants, Sergeant Norling and Sergeant Nartatez,
21
would drive up there and make contact with him, and then
22
myself and Alfredo Ruiz would follow in a car about a
23
block, block-and-a-half behind.
24
contact, that we would get out and get there to support
25
them in case he decided to resist.
And once they made
And then I added the

Page: 721
phone call into Lieutenant Flores to get his assistance,
since he was up there, and to stand by and be ready to
help in case things went bad.
4
5
And ultimately, that was the plan that
attempted to be executed; right?
Correct.
Now, you heard Chief Martin testify yesterday;
right?
Yes.
10
And he said that one of the reasons that he has
11
terminated you is because you lied.
Did you hear that?
12
I did.
13
And that was nowhere in your letter of Intent
14
to Terminate, was it?
15
No.
16
There are separate policies that you can
17
prosecute someone for lying; isn't that true?
18
That's true.
19
Other than as stated in your letter of
20
discipline; right?
21
Right.
22
I mean you yourself as a manager have had to
23
impose discipline before; right?
24
Yes.
25
And utilize the policies; correct?
Page: 722
Correct.
So you're familiar with them; true?
Yes.
All right.
One of the things that you were
accused of lying about was who got out of the car at the
gate on the way out to the Covarrubias shooting.
I guess there's some disparity about whether you got out
first; right?
Right.
10
Or who?
11
Or Norling.
12
Right.
13
Okay.
Norling?
What's your understanding of who got
out of the car first?
14
I have no idea.
15
Whether it was you or Norling, did it matter?
16
No.
17
At that time, did that have anything to do with
18
what went forward?
19
No.
20
I'm going to stop there for a minute.
21
You also heard all these suggestions that other
22
people came to you -- Ruiz, Norling, Nartatez -- and
23
they all told you that you should do something different
24
or stop the plan; right?
25
Correct.
Page: 723
Were those things told to you at the time?
No.
You've had an opportunity to review the
Sheriff's investigation in this matter?
Yes.
You testified in that investigation as well?
I did.
When was that investigation conducted?
That night.
10
So after you --
11
June 28th.
12
You mean January 28th?
13
January 28th.
14
So after the shooting happens --
15
The morning hours of January 28th.
16
Okay.
17
Yes.
18
So after the shooting happens, where do these
19
I'm sorry.
June 28th.
2:00, 3:00, 4:00 in the morning?
interviews take place?
20
At the Radisson Hotel in Santa Maria.
21
Are you all put on a bus and taken over there,
22
or how do you get there?
23
24
there.
25
I didn't go by bus.
I'm not sure how I got
Are you told not to discuss it before you give
Page: 724
your interview?
Yes.
Is that part of the protocol; you can't talk
with anyone to get your story straight?
Correct.
Why is that done, based on your experience?
Because you don't want people to have -- get
stories straight and start filling in the gaps based on
what other people are saying, and then it turns out to
10
11
be something other than what is true.

Q
So the whole purpose of sequestering people
12
immediately after a shooting is so they can't try to
13
compare notes and change what really happened?
14
Correct.
15
And you reviewed the Sheriff's investigations
16
on all these other gentlemen as well?
17
Yes.
18
Did you see anywhere in any of those
19
investigations the notes that were done on or about
20
January 28th where any of those men said that they had
21
told you to alter the plan or change it before you went
22
out there?
23
No.
24
That only comes after the fact, once you've
25
seen the internal affairs investigation?
Page: 725
Yes.
All those gentlemen that were mentioned,
Mr. Ruiz, Nartatez, Norling, all their stories changed
from the time of the Sheriff's investigation done on it,
right after the shooting, and the time that the internal
affairs investigation was done?
Yes, there were changes.
Let's talk about one more change.
You were
asked --
10
Then excuse me.
Do I
11
have those documents in the file already, marked for
12
identification, that I can annotate the transcript as to
13
what documents to look at to compare?
14
MR. MILLER:
That's a good question.
What I
15
want to put in evidence -- do you have the original
16
thumb drive that we had given you?
17
MR. GONZALES:
18
MR. MILLER:
19
20
in.
Right here.
I would like to put the original
Any objection?
MR. GONZALES:
Well, that thumb drive has, I
21
think, some of the documentation we were concerned about
22
in the personnel file.
23
Am I accurate on that?
We don't have to take
24
care of this now, but I mean at some point I would like
25
to be able to look at that myself and draw my own
Page: 726
conclusions, and I just want to know where that is.
MR. MILLER:
It can be under seal, but it was
provided to Mr. Ast.
This is what was provided to him
by the City to defend himself.
give you this because it has everything on it.
6
7
MR. GONZALES:
10
This is what we gave him back in
March of 2013.
8
9
In other words, I would
have to go through that, though, to find the Sheriff's

statements and compare them with the IA statements?
11
MS. BERNAL:
12
13
So I think we should
It's also Defense Exhibit 16.

Okay.
That's City
Exhibit 16.
14
MS. BERNAL:
I haven't looked through it.
15
presume it's the whole thing and it's what they have in
16
their --
17
MR. MILLER:
Let's do this just so the record
18
is clear because I want to put this in evidence anyway.
19
This is going to come in under seal.
20
What is our next in order?
21
MS. BERNAL:
22
(Exhibit GG was marked for identification.)
23
24
25
GG?
Yes, it is.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
I am going to hand you Exhibit GG.
Do you
recognize that?
Page: 727
Yes.
What is it?
It's the thumb drive I was given when I was --
when I was terminated.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
To defend yourself in this action with the
City?
A
Yes.
MR. MILLER:
I'm going to give the original to
the hearing officer because there's only one copy.
This
is Exhibit GG.
My suggestion is you
12
figure out how to get it in an envelope and maybe
13
three-hole the envelope, and then I can put it right
14
into the binder and it won't get lost, and I'll know
15
what it is.
16
17
MR. MILLER:
Can I put it here for now?
We'll
deal with it later.
18
19
MR. MILLER:
Okay.
Thank you.
And on that
20
hard drive, at a minimum, we can agree how to replace or
21
supplement --
22
23
MR. MILLER:
24
25
MR. MILLER:
Okay.
-- out of the Sheriff's reports -Okay.
-- for the entire investigation.
Page: 728
We can stipulate to --
The reason I do this is
because it facilities my study of the record because
then I can stop looking at the transcript and I can go
look at the appropriate items without searching for
them.
MR. MILLER:
MR. MILLER:
10
11
12
Thank you.
Go ahead.
I agree it would be nice to have.
Mr. Sakai can do that.

All right.
Thank you
very much.
13
And were you offering this into evidence?
14
MR. MILLER:
15
16
17
I am.
All right.
Is there any
objection?
MR. GONZALES:
Well, again, there are certain
18
areas in there that we believe are privileged in the
19
individual's personnel files.
20
be made public.
21
separating much of this in a -- under seal.
22
So obviously, that cannot
I know we've been talking about
Or having a some kind of
23
a protective order that governs the manner in which the
24
hearing officer writes the decision.
25
work on that later.
We can -- we can
Let's try and finish the testimony.
Page: 729
1
2
MR. MILLER:
Can we get it as accepted into
evidence?
So I will, subject to
those details which we will work out with either a
protective order or some kind of a special procedure for
concealing the identities of people or however we
ultimately approach it, but I will receive it subject to
those concerns which will be addressed before we
conclude the hearing.
10
MR. MILLER:
11
(Exhibit GG was received into evidence
12
under seal.)
13
14
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
And one of the things that you were asked about
15
was whether you said words like, "Just kill him," or,
16
"Just fucking kill him."
17
what you were asked.
Excuse me for that, but that's
18
Yes.
19
Did you ever say those words?
20
I don't remember saying those words.
21
And --
22
I can't imagine even saying those words.
23
Who were you accused of saying those words to?
24
Alfredo Ruiz.
25
And you looked at Mr. Ruiz's statement to the
Page: 730
Sheriff's Department on January 28th, 2012, or
thereabouts?
I did.
Were those statements included anywhere in his
comments?
No.
Something again that came after the fact?
Yes.
I'm going to show you the transcript that the
10
City was previously reading excerpts from.
11
it's Defense Exhibit 25.
12
MR. GONZALES:
13
MR. MILLER:
14
17
18
19
20
21
Defense Exhibit 24 is Volume One;
MR. GONZALES:
Accurate.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
Can you look at both of those and confirm that
that's your transcript of your internal affairs hearing?

A
Yes, it looks to be.

MR. MILLER:
Any objection to moving 24 and 25
into evidence?
22
MR. GONZALES:
23
MR. MILLER:
24
25
That's Volume Two.
right?
15
16
Correct.
I believe
No objection.
Great.
All right.
Then City
Exhibits 24 and 25 will be received.
Page: 731
(Exhibits 24 and 25 were received into
evidence.)
MR. GONZALES:
also be admitted into evidence.
MR. MILLER:
MR. GONZALES:
I would ask that the audio disks
that.
12
Then that takes care of
I hope there's an index
on the thumb dive.
10
11
Okay.
Thank you.
8
9
They're on the thumb drive.
MR. GONZALES:
There is.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
If we take a look at Exhibit 25, Page 92,
13
Mr. Gonzales had started reading from Page 91 into the
14
record about that same statement.
15
MR. GONZALES:
16
MR. MILLER:
Excuse me.
Yeah, 25-91.
You said 25?

We'll start from
17
there.
18
reacclimating all of us where we were.
19
It's more clear if we start from there,
You'll recall that Mr. Gonzales read into the
20
record the whole quote about do you remember making or
21
remember responding to Ruiz making a statement that
22
said, "Just kill him"?
23
Yes.
24
And he read part of the record; right?
25
Yes.
Page: 732
At Page 25-92, can you read -- why don't you
read what your testimony was from Page 25-91, Line 19,
all the way --
MR. GONZALES:
MR. MILLER:
I'm going to restate
Why don't you read into the record, and I'm
sorry to make you -- I don't have it in a handy way.
9
10
I'm sorry.
it.
7
8
You changed it.
You know what?
You don't have to transcribe
this.
11
Why don't you read into the record the
12
following lines, Page 25 -- or excuse me -- Exhibit 25.
13
I'm getting confused by numbers.
14
transcript, Lines 19 through 25, through Page 92 of the
15
transcript, Lines 1 through 6.
16
17
Is there any objection to
her not transcribing that since I have it in the book?
18
MR. GONZALES:
19
20
Page 91 of the
I have no objection.
Okay.
We'll go off the
record to have it read.
21
(The requested testimony was read
22
by the witness.)
23
24
record.
25
BY MR. MILLER:
Page: 733
Mr. Ast, you don't recall making the statement
that Mr. Gonzales asked you in the first instance, the
"Just kill him"; right?
No, I don't.
But you have a different recollection.
extent that you would have made any statement to
Mr. Ruiz, what would it have been, words to the
effect --
To the
Words to that if it were, "If he does something
10
where he pulls his gun or tries to kill you and you have
11
to consider self-preservation, then you might have to
12
take action."
13
Is that a difficult part of your job?
14
Yes.
15
Have you ever been shot at before?
16
Yes.
17
On more than one occasion?
18
Yes.
19
Is that part of your training, that if somebody
20
shoots at you, you shoot back?
21
Yes.
22
Do you shoot to typically injure them?
23
24
25
Is that
how you're trained?

A
No.
And just so the record is

Page: 734
clear, I assume you shoot to make a lethal shot so that
the person is disabled from being able to fire off
another round.
4
5
Is that right?
THE WITNESS:
BY MR. MILLER:
That's something you're trained to do; right,
Yes, it is.
Turning back to the evening of January 27th,
sir?
10
into the morning of January 28th, you go out to the
11
parking lot and you talk to Rico Flores, right, at the
12
station?
13
Yes.
14
What's discussed in that call?
15
I'm sorry.
16
I'm sorry.
17
18
I'm switching it up on you.
You have a conversation with Mr. Flores before

you go out to the scene; right?
19
Yes.
20
What's discussed between you and Mr. Flores on
21
that call?
22
At the station?
23
Yes.
24
Inside his office?
25
Is that what you're
referring to?
Page: 735
No, I'm talking about before you go out to the
scene, you have a conversation with Mr. Flores to add
him to the team; right?
Oh, yes, on the phone call you mean?
Yes, sorry.
6
7
I'm not being clear.
What do you discuss on that call?

A
I told him what we had, that we were coming out
to arrest Officer Covarrubias, that he was a suspect in
a child molest investigation, that he went suicidal on
10
the telephone and disconnected.
11
with him, keep us informed where he is, his whereabouts,
12
and I asked him where he was and if he could locate him.
I asked him to stay
13
Did he refuse any of your requests?
14
No.
15
Did he understand the urgency?
16
Seemed like it, yes.
17
18
MR. GONZALES:
Speculation.
BY MR. MILLER:
19
At least as far as you were able to perceive?
20
Yes.
21
Did Rico Flores agree that he was going to
22
stand near Albert Covarrubias to help maintain the
23
situation before you got there?
24
Yes.
25
So that when you got there, he would be right
Page: 736
there at the scene; right?
Correct.
When you got to the scene, did you come to
learn whether or not Rico Flores was in fact by Albert
Covarrubias?
Yes, afterwards.
What did you learn in that regard?
That he was not there to help out with the
9
10
11
arrest.
Q
He was nowhere to be found near where Albert
Covarrubias was.
Is that your understanding?
12
Yes.
13
That's the potential hostage negotiator; right?
14
Yes.
15
Where did he go?
16
I don't know.
17
Did he ever explain where he went to your
18
knowledge?
19
No.
20
I just want to focus on that 'cause I can't
21
quite get it.
22
Mr. Flores knew you were coming out to the scene; right?
What you're telling me is that
23
Yes.
24
Knew you were going to arrest a police officer;
25
right?
Page: 737
Correct.
Knew that you had to make contact with him;
right?
Yes.
You asked him, with all his background and
training, to be right by Mr. Covarrubias to help take
him into custody safely; right?
Yes.
It's your understanding that when your guys get
10
out there, he's nowhere to be found; right?
11
Correct.
12
Leaving the two sergeants to try to take him
13
into custody themselves with you following up behind?
14
Yes.
15
Now, you heard a statement earlier that there
16
was some question about whether there was supposed to be
17
this five-man arrest team.
18
five-man arrest team?
Was there supposed to be a
19
Yes, there was.
20
You were asked whether it was called into
21
question about that by Mr. Ruiz.
22
Yes.
23
Where was Mr. Ruiz sitting -- or excuse me.
24
25
How did Mr. Ruiz get out to the scene of the shooting?
A
He was a passenger in my car.
Page: 738
1
2
Okay.
So he knew that you were going out to
the scene; right?
Yes.
Did he also understand that the other two
detectives were going out to the scene?
The other two sergeants?
Excuse me.
Yes.
And did he know that you had called Rico
10
Sergeants.
Thank you.
Flores?
11
He did.
12
If I counted it all out, those are five
13
14
individuals; right?
A
15
Yes.
How do you know that he
16
knew that you had called -- was he standing right there
17
when --
18
19
THE WITNESS:
conversation.
20
21
22
23
He overheard the phone
All right.
Okay.
BY MR. MILLER:
Q
You've heard some criticism about the fact that
you took a white car out to the scene.
24
Yes.
25
Was there ever any indication that Albert
Page: 739
Covarrubias ever saw that white car?
No.
Or reacted the way he did because of that white
No.
In fact, by the time you pulled up anywhere
car?
near the scene, shots had just gone off; right?
Yes.
And you came to understand that a struggle had
10
already taken place?
11
Yes.
12
And based on what you came to learn, did
13
Officer Covarrubias want to be taken into custody?
14
No, he did not.
15
Are you familiar with the term in your industry
16
"suicide by cop"?
Have you ever heard that before?
17
Yes.
18
What does that mean?
19
It means that a person decides when they want
20
to die that they're not going to do it themselves.
21
They're going to have a police officer do it for them.
22
23
24
25
Is that a term familiar to you in your
industry?
A
Very, very familiar with it.
it myself.
I've experienced
I had to shoot somebody because of that.
Page: 740
And killed them?
Yes.
And that's a very unfortunate situation to be
in in your job; right?
It is.
Why is that?
7
8
9
Is that because the person takes
action and forces you to do it?

A
Because you end up killing somebody that didn't
need to die.
It's horrible.
10
Is that what happened here?
11
Yes.
12
In your opinion, is there anything that you
13
could have done to stop that or prevent that?
14
No.
15
Did you want Mr. Covarrubias to die?
16
No.
17
Do you ever want to see that happen as a police
18
officer?
19
No.
20
What's your job as a police officer?
21
What do
you try to do every day when you go in to work?
22
To preserve life and property.
23
Is that something you've taken an oath to do?
24
Yes.
25
Is that important to you?
Keep the peace.
Page: 741
It is.
Did you care about that when you were a
lieutenant, or did you take those duties as a laissez
faire type of thing?
No, I cared about that greatly.
Your job has been taken away from you; right?
Yes.
Has that been something that's been difficult
for you?
10
Very difficult.
11
You were asked about whether your work was all
12
about money; right?
13
Yes.
14
And whether the overtime issues were about
15
money; right?
16
Correct.
17
Was it about money?
18
No, sir.
19
What were your concerns about overtime?
20
That the hours that were being worked overtime
21
were excessive for the traffic unit.
22
Come, Lieutenant Ginter were all former motor officers.
23
Jim Ginter worked for both departments on motors.
24
know what it's like to be out there on the road for a
25
long shift.
Myself, Lieutenant
We
And then to have to turn around and do
Page: 742
overtime afterwards and to put a motor in that position
where he's -- he's assigned 18, 19, and it could be, if
he gets an arrest, 20 hours of overtime, you're asking
for trouble.
It's just a dangerous thing to put a
person into.
You're standing in the traffic line,
you've got your gun with you.
you going to react?
situation we had something that I think -- I think that
got worse because people were tired.
10
If something happens, are
Are you going to be tired?
In this
Let me make sure I understand how it works for
11
folks, for example, in the traffic department.
12
you're going to work a DUI checkpoint and work overtime
13
to do that, that means you work the whole day, right, on
14
the day shift?
15
On some people.
16
So they could work a full day shift.
17
If
How long
is that, typically?
18
10 hours.
19
And then they would stay and work into the
20
evening?
21
Yes.
22
For approximately how many more hours?
23
Another 8 or 9 hours.
24
And so what was your concern in that regard?
25
That somebody could get hurt because of being
Page: 743
so tired.
And in the shooting in question, the Albert
Covarrubias shooting, did you ever come to learn how
long Mr. Flores had been working that day?
Yes.
How many hours?
18.
Mr. Kline, the individual who shot
9
10
Mr. Covarrubias, how many hours had he been working that

day?
11
He was in his 19th hour.
12
Did he even know that he shot Mr. Covarrubias?
13
No, he did not.
14
I think --
15
16
the identity of the person whom he shot?
17
18
19
You mean he didn't know
MR. MILLER:
Q
Correct.
Was it your understanding that fatigue played a
factor in what happened here?
20
MR. GONZALES:
Speculation, lack of foundation.
21
He's certainly not qualified to answer that kind of a
22
question.
23
24
25
MR. MILLER:
Q
I disagree.
Based on your knowledge, training, and
experience --
Page: 744
1
2
MR. GONZALES:
I'm sure you do, but there's an
objection.
Well, I think it's a
question that calls for opinion.
standards of opinion testimony under California law are
rather liberal as you both know.
statute.
he would have a basis upon which to render an opinion on
that.
10
11
12
You've read the
So you'd have to establish a foundation that
MR. MILLER:
Q
And, you know, the
I'll do that.
Happy to do it.
Mr. Ast, prior to the Covarrubias shooting, you
worked over 20 years in law enforcement?
13
Yes.
14
You had an opportunity to observe officers in
15
the field as a supervisor?
16
Yes.
17
And as a higher level manager even?
18
Yes.
19
You conducted investigations for the department
20
at some point in time; right?
21
Yes.
22
You had reviewed investigations, including
23
criminal investigations, at some point in time?
24
Yes.
25
You were charged at times in the department
Page: 745
with looking into the cause for why certain crimes or
shootings happened; right?
Correct.
And you had done that prior to the Covarrubias
shooting?
Yes.
And you had a chance then to subsequently
review the internal affairs investigation that was done
here?
10
Yes.
11
As well as the interviews by the Sheriff's
12
Department?
13
Correct.
14
And based on that, did you come to an opinion
15
about whether fatigue played a factor in the shooting?
16
Yes, I did.
17
What was that opinion?
18
MR. GONZALES:
19
Ms. Hearing Officer.
20
deprivation --
21
Objection, Your Honor -- or

He's not qualified to give a sleep
Well, I think he's giving
22
an opinion as a former investigator.
23
investigators take the stand to give expert opinions all
24
the time.
25
MR. GONZALES:
I mean
He's asking for an expert

Page: 746
opinion.
So, I mean, you can argue
about how much it means or you can have your own
opinions on the subject, but I'm not going to preclude
him from giving his opinion.
6
7
Go ahead.
BY MR. MILLER:
Did fatigue play a factor in this shooting?
I believe so, yes.
10
11
for just a moment.
12
13
THE COURT:
14
Go ahead, Mr. Miller.
15
MR. MILLER:
16
So let's go back on the record.
Mr. Ast, when we left off, we were talking
17
about fatigue.
18
the time of the Covarrubias shooting regarding fatigue?
Did the department have a practice at
19
Yes.
20
To make sure that its officers were not
21
fatigued?
22
Yes.
23
What was that practice?
24
It was a schedule that we developed.
25
I was
their -- a part of their development team down in
Page: 747
Irvine, California.
forgot.
that, I would have remembered it.
It's called -- oh, no, now I just
I just blanked out.
If I wouldn't have said
Anyway, it's our scheduling program.
And then
we agreed when we went there down there, myself,
Commander Green, Sharon Westcott, the office manager,
and Lieutenant Chris Vaughn, that if you -- that you
don't schedule people beyond 16 working hours in the
daytime; that anything after that is -- you're going to
10
be just too tired, based on what we know, to be out
11
there working.
12
there and schedule them into exhaustion, which would be
13
16 hours, beyond that.
14
15
So you don't want to put people out
So that's a computer system that you had that
you did the scheduling in?
16
Yes.
17
Teletext?
18
Telestaff.
19
Telestaff.
20
Sorry.
21
Did it have a block on the scheduling, then, so
22
23
Thank you.
that you couldn't schedule anyone over 16 hours?

A
If they were coming back the next day and it
24
would run into their shift, it would cancel it out so
25
that you couldn't schedule it.
Page: 748
And that was to prevent the fatigue?
Yes.
So in order to have these individuals working
overtime at 18 and 19 hours, did somebody have to
manually go in and override that?
Yes.
Was that part of the complaints that you later
-- or excuse me.
you had made not 12 days earlier with Ms. Lara?
Is that part of the complaints that
10
Yes.
11
In her office?
12
Yes.
13
When you spoke to her?
14
Correct.
15
About the fatigue factor?
16
Yes.
17
About people working too much overtime, because
18
they're tired?
19
Yes.
20
About the computer system being manipulated?
21
Yes.
22
Those were all things you told her?
23
Correct.
24
Did it have anything to do with money?
25
No.
Page: 749
1
2
And Ms. Lara knew that you told her those
things; right?
Yes.
How long were you in her office when you made
your initial complaints?
About an hour-and-a-half.
Detailing all the other things that were
summarized in your written complaint?
Yes.
10
Who was with you?
11
Lieutenant Norm Come.
12
He was also detailing all sorts of items to her
13
at that point?
14
He was.
15
Prior to the Covarrubias shooting, if Commander
16
Ritz had told you not to go out and try to arrest
17
Covarrubias, would you have followed that order?
18
Yes.
19
If Chief Macagni had told you not to go out and
20
arrest Albert Covarrubias, would you have followed that
21
order?
22
Yes.
23
Just like you followed the order of Commander
24
25
Ritz to go out and arrest Albert Covarrubias?

A
Correct.
Page: 750
1
2
order given the circumstances?
4
5
6
You did not understand that to be an unlawful
Correct.
MR. MILLER:
I think that's a good place to
stop.
THE COURT:
Okay.
We'll be in recess until
tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m., at which time we will
reconvene back to the City Hall location.
We'll be off the record.
10
(At 5:19 p.m., an adjournment was taken until
11
Thursday, June 5, 2014, at 9:00 a.m.)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page: 751
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
)
) ss.
)
3
4
I, YOLANDA C. HERNANDEZ, CERTIFIED SHORTHAND
REPORTER, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING PAGES
COMPRISE A TRUE AND CORRECT TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDINGS HAD IN THE WITHIN-ENTITLED MATTER, REPORTED
BY ME BY STENOTYPE ON THE DATE AND AT THE HOUR HEREIN
WRITTEN, AND THEREAFTER TRANSCRIBED UNDER MY DIRECTION
10
INTO TYPEWRITING.
11
IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 8016 OF THE BUSINESS
12
AND PROFESSIONS CODE, I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY
13
THAT I AM A CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER WITH LICENSE
14
NUMBER 7389 IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.
15
16
WITNESS MY HAND THIS_______ DAY OF____________,

20____.
17
18
19
________________________________
20
YOLANDA C. HERNANDEZ
21
CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER
22
23
24
25
Page: 752

6 4 14

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

6 4 14

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CITY OF SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of Discipline of )

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

THE HEARING IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF DANIEL AST,

was taken at Santa Maria Public Library, 421 South

McClelland Street, Santa Maria, California, before

Yolanda C. Hernandez, CSR #7389, a Certified Shorthand

Reporter for the State of California, on Wednesday,

June 4, 2014, commencing at the hour of 9:56 A.M.

FOR THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY CITY OF SANTA MARIA:

FOR THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT DANIEL AST:

NYE, PEABODY, STIRLING, HALE & MILLER, LLP

McDANIEL REPORTING & VIDEO CONFERENCING

CITY OF SANTA MARIA:

PORTIONS DESIGNATED CONFIDENTIAL

(Bound Under Separate Cover)

(Bound under separate cover)

24 - Transcript of I.A. Interview of

25 - Transcript of I.A. Interview of

31 - Recording of voicemail message

FF - Police Department Organization

SANTA MARIA, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 2014

THE HEARING OFFICER:

Good morning, everyone.

This is Day 3 in the Matter of the Appeal of Dan Ast.

And we spent a little time off the record getting our

Thank you to both parties for providing the

And Mr. Gonzales, do you have a witness?

call Dan Ast to the stand.

THE HEARING OFFICER:

Mr. Ast, would you

raise your right hand, please.

Appellant herein, called as a witness under

the provisions of Section 776 of the Evidence

Code, was duly sworn testified as follows:

McDANIEL REPORTING & VIDEO CONFERENCING

(PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE CODE SECTION 776)

Good morning, sir.

Have you reviewed anything prior to coming to

Can you identify which ones they are, please?

We have reviewed the Sheriff's Department

The testimony as it pertained to me.

reviewed a lot of different paperwork.

Do you have a recollection of -- can you

identify what it was?

Did you read through

expand a little bit on exactly what it was you reviewed.

Summaries, or the actual testimony?

Did you listen to any of the audiotape

recordings of the interviews?

Which ones did you listen to?

I listened to mine, Sergeant Norling, Sergeant

McDANIEL REPORTING & VIDEO CONFERENCING

Chris Nartatez, Chief Macagni, Craig Ritz, and there may

have been one or two others.

Did you listen to those from the

beginning to the end?

Did you take any notes during the course of

Do you have those notes with you?

When was it that you last listened to those

About a month ago.

Have you, since that month to today's date,

have you reviewed any of those by listening to them?