How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
REGIONAL: Police investigate series of attacks on women near college campus
The Chico Police Department said it’s reporting a number of assaults – several of them sexual in nature – against college-age women that have taken place in the area of California State University, Chico’s south campus neighborhood.
Sgt. Scott Franssen said the attacks go back to to August 2011, with the most recent occurring on Aug. 26, Sept. 1 and Sept. 22.
Franssen said police detectives noticed that two of the most recent incidents involved “newer,” “nice” black BMW or Lexus cars.
In the fall of 2011 police received reports of females being attacked and sprayed with pepper spray. In two of those incidents the suspect was associated with a similarly described vehicle. In one of those incidents the victim was pushed down but she fought off her attacker, Franssen said.
Not all of these young women were sexually assaulted, probably because they fought their attackers, according to Franssen.
Common to all of these attacks is that the victims were alone, either walking or waiting, he said. The majority of them were walking home alone in the very early morning hours.
Another common factor in the attacks, said Franssen, was the use of alcohol and varying levels of intoxication amongst the majority – not all – of the victims. That intoxication may be one of the weaknesses that the perpetrators prey upon.
In five of the cases there was some level of sexual assault. In one of those cases – which occurred on Jan. 29 – the suspect was arrested, Franssen said.
Police are asking community members to take precautions to protect themselves and each other, including not walking alone at night and keeping alcohol consumption to a reasonable level in order to be less vulnerable.
The Chico Police Department also is asking for help in solving these crimes and preventing others. Anyone with information about these incidents is encouraged to contact the Chico Police Department at 530-897-4900.
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News reports
Bomb threat leads to courthouse evacuation; undersheriff says threat based on marijuana eradications
LAKEPORT, Calif. – A bomb threat on Wednesday afternoon led to an evacuation of the Lake County Courthouse, with the county’s undersheriff reporting that the threat allegedly was in response to the ongoing marijuana eradications taking place around the county.
Court personnel, county staffers and members of the public began streaming out of the building – located at 255 N. Forbes in Lakeport – shortly after 2:15 p.m., after a county official was directed by the sheriff’s office to activate the building’s fire alarm, signaling everyone to clear the building.
Those who had left the building gathered at the Courthouse Museum square across the street as Lake County Sheriff’s deputies, Lakeport Police and California State Parks responded to close down the building and set up a safety perimeter.
Lakeport Public Works put up barricades to block off N. Forbes Street between First and Fifth streets, with barriers also placed at N. Forbes Street’s intersections with Second and Third streets. Sheriff’s and Lakeport Police patrol cars also were used to block the streets.
Undersheriff Pat Turturici, who was on scene shortly after the building was vacated, said an anonymous male subject had phoned in the threat to Lake County Record-Bee reporter Jeremy Walsh, with the newspaper in turn reporting it to the sheriff’s office.
Turturici said the caller made the threat in co
nnection to the sheriff’s office’s ongoing marijuana eradications around Lake County.
Ten law enforcement officers were involved with searching the building, Turturici said. Each of the floors was searched and nothing was found.
Just before 3 p.m. the all clear was given and the public and staff were allowed to return to the building. The street barricades later were cleared.
Turturici said the sheriff’s office was continuing to investigate the threat, and there were plans to talk to Walsh to get further information about the call.
The sheriff’s office doesn’t plan to let up on eradicating illegal marijuana grows around the county because of the threat, the undersheriff said.
Turturici said this was the third bomb threat targeting county facilities since the start of 2011.
In April 2011, a threat was called in to the courthouse a short time before the start of a Lake County Planning Commission meeting that had a proposed ordinance to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries on the agenda.
The caller in that 2011 threat had warned, “don’t mess with the marijuana users,” according to the sheriff’s office.
This past January, the Lake County Superior Court’s Clearlake courthouse – which also houses a Lake County Sheriff’s substation – was evacuated as the result of a bomb threat.
Turturici said the county has no bomb sniffing dog to help quickly and safely respond to such situations, and a dog from a neighboring agency wasn’t readily available for the Wednesday incident.
An explosive ordinance disposal K-9 detection team from Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield had been called in to deal with the April 2011 threat.
Turturici said he was looking at getting such a bomb sniffing dog in light of the continuing threats the county was receiving.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Supervisors approve final contract with sheriff’s attorney
LAKEPORT, Calif. – On Tuesday the Board of Supervisors approved a final contract with a Southern California law firm that will represent the sheriff in response to an investigation into allegations that he lied about a shooting incident he was involved in while a deputy.
In a 4-1 vote, with Board Chair Rob Brown voting no, the board approved the contract with Jones & Mayer of Fullerton, with a cap of $6,500, for legal representation for Sheriff Frank Rivero.
District Attorney Don Anderson is considering whether or not to give Rivero a “Brady letter” in connection with a February 2008 shooting in which he shot at – but did not hit – a man holding pepper spray.
It’s alleged that Rivero lied to investigators about the incident, which Anderson investigated after taking office last year.
Based on case law that developed from the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision Brady v. Maryland, prosecutors cannot withhold potentially exculpatory information from the criminal defendants. That includes the requirement that they divulge any credibility issues of law enforcement officers involved in criminal cases.
In March, the board refused to hire Rivero an attorney to respond to Anderson’s investigation, instead wanting County Counsel Anita Grant – who had declared a conflict – to explore erecting an ethical wall in her department so one of her staffers could represent him.
Last month a visiting judge gave Rivero a writ of mandate to force the board to pay for his legal expenses in the case based on Government Code Section 31000.6, which says the board “shall contract with and employ legal counsel to assist the assessor or the sheriff in the performance of his or her duties in any case where the county counsel or the district attorney would have a conflict of interest in representing the assessor or the sheriff.”
Anderson, who has been waiting for the situation to be resolved so he can make a finding, is due to meet with Jones & Mayer on Oct. 9, with a decision expected the following day, Grant told the board Tuesday.
Last week, the board had asked Grant to write a letter to Anderson asking him to expedite his decision. Brown said he still wanted that letter sent to Anderson.
The letter to Anderson Grant drafted acknowledges that the decision is “solely within your purview as the District Attorney and this Board does not intend to intrude in any way in that process. We do, however, want you to be aware that it would be a great service to the County and our residents if you proceed with this matter as expeditiously as possible.”
“Basically, this is a public defender for the sheriff,” Brown said during Tuesday’s meeting, explaining that he wanted to make sure Rivero’s calls and communication with the law firm are kept to a minimum and relevant to the case.
“We have a real problem here. We have a sheriff who spends more time in court that Lindsay Lohan,” said Brown, adding that he doesn’t want Rivero gathering information for other cases.
Grant said the contract is limited to this case alone, and Jones & Mayer is ethically constrained to adhere to it.
“We're all doing this holding our noses,” said Brown. “I can't support this.”
Supervisor Jim Comstock wanted to know what programs in the county wouldn’t happen due to spending the money on the attorney’s contract.
Grant said the funds will come from the Local Assistance for Rural and Small County Law Enforcement fund. “I think there’s a very healthy amount of money in there.”
Supervisor Anthony Farrington asked if the county would have to provide legal counsel beyond Anderson’s decision if Rivero doesn’t like it.
“Where does this end?” asked Farrington, who wanted to know how far it could go under the state statute.
Grant said that just because a person wants to take something to court doesn’t mean they have the legal basis to do so. She added that the courts give great weight to Brady decisions.
While the case could go to the superior court and beyond, she said attorneys have ethical obligations not to pursue legal actions that are not legally sound. That doesn’t mean the client will take the advice.
“At this point I think there is not a foregone conclusion,” said Grant, who added that she believed Anderson will have a fair and open process.
She said that to pursue the cause further, it will need to be proven that it’s a reasonable and justifiable use of funds. Community members also will have to agree. “Those decisions are made at the ballot box,” Grant said.
Farrington moved to approve the agreement, which passed 4-1, with Brown the dissenting vote. Two motions that followed – one to approve the letter to Anderson and the second to approve a resolution to appropriate the money – each passed 5-0.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Supervisors to discuss final agreement for sheriff’s legal counsel; consider response to wildfires
LAKEPORT, Calif. – This week the Board of Supervisors will consider a final agreement with a law firm that will represent the sheriff in response to a district attorney’s investigation and discuss the county’s response to recent wildland fires.
The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 25, in the board chambers at the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport. The meeting will be broadcast live on TV8.
In an untimed discussion, the board will consider the proposed agreement for professional services between the county of Lake and Jones & Mayer for the legal representation of Sheriff Frank Rivero. The initial maximum contract amount is for $6,500.
A visiting Mendocino County judge last month granted Rivero a writ of mandate against the county in order to get the legal counsel to represent him in meetings with District Attorney Don Anderson.
Anderson has investigated allegations that Rivero lied during an investigation into a February 2008 shooting in which Rivero, then a sheriff’s deputy, shot at a man who was holding a can of pepper spray. The man was not hit.
If Anderson concludes Rivero lied, he will give Rivero a “Brady letter,” which denotes a member of law enforcement who has credibility issues. If Rivero is listed as a Brady officer, it must be divulged to the defense in any criminal cases in which Rivero is involved, based on case law that has developed from the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case, Brady v. Maryland.
The board also will consider a proposal Supervisor Anthony Farrington made at last week’s meeting to send a letter to Anderson asking him to expedite his decision on whether to give Rivero a Brady letter.
Also on Tuesday, during a discussion timed for 9:15 a.m., the board will get an update on the emergency action it took on Aug. 21 in response to the Wye and Walker fires, which burned thousands of acres east of Clearlake Oaks.
During the discussion, the board also will consider the coordinated county response to the recent wildfires and recommendations to improve county preparation for future emergencies.
The full agenda follows.
TIMED ITEMS
9 a.m., A-1 to A-4: Approval of consent agenda, which includes items that are expected to be routine and noncontroversial, and will be acted upon by the board at one time without discussion; presentation of animals available for adoption at Lake County Animal Care and Control; consideration of items not appearing on the posted agenda, and contract change orders for current construction projects.
9:05 a.m.: Citizen's input. Any person may speak for three minutes about any subject of concern, provided that it is within the jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors and is not already on the agenda. Prior to this time, speakers must fill out a slip giving name, address and subject (available in the clerk of the board’s office, first floor, courthouse).
9:15 a.m., A-5: (a) Update on emergency action taken Aug. 21, 2012 regarding the Wye and Walker fires (continued from Sept. 4, 2012); and (b) discussion/consideration of coordinated county response to the recent wildfire incidents and recommendations to improve county preparation for future emergencies.
NONTIMED ITEMS
A-6: Supervisors’ weekly calendar, travel and reports.
A-7: Consideration of proposed response to the FY 2011-12 Grand Jury Final Report.
A-8: Consideration of appointments of a director and alternate to the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) Board of Directors for 2012-2013.
A-9: (a) Consideration of proposed agreement for professional services between the county of Lake and Jones & Mayer for the legal representation of Sheriff Rivero (initial maximum contract amount of $6,500); and (b) consideration of proposed letter to District Attorney Anderson urging him to expeditiously resolve the ongoing Brady issue involving Sheriff Rivero.
A-10: Consideration of request to approve out of state travel for Det. Dennis Keithly to attend the 2012 Clan Lab Certification Laboratory Training in Quantico, Virginia, from Oct. 1-5, 2012.
CLOSED SESSION
A-11: 1.Conference with Labor Negotiator: (a) County Negotiators: A. Grant, L. Guintivano, M. Perry, J. Hammond and A. Flora; and (b) Employee Organization: DDAA, LCCOA and LCAA.
A-11: 2. Conference with Legal Counsel: Pending litigation decision whether to initiate litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c): One potential case.
CONSENT AGENDA
C-1: Approve minutes of the Board of Supervisors meetings held on Aug. 29 and Sept. 18, 2012.
C-2: Adopt resolution approving the application of the Lake County Arts Council for the California Arts Council Grant and authorizing the execution of the grant contract.
C-3: Adopt Resolution authorizing funding of Grant Project-Lake County DUI Intensive Response Team.
C-4: Adopt resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-107 establishing position allocations to conform to the adopted budget for Fiscal Year 2012-2013 (establishing one Information Systems Analyst I and one Nurse Practitioner/Physician Assistant position).
C-5: Approve the 2011-2012 Annual Report from the Lake County Library Advisory Board.
C-6: Adopt resolution approving the application for grant funds from the Habitat Conservation Fund Program.
C-7: Adopt resolution approving the application for grant funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
C-8: Approve first amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and Chapel of the Lakes (adding fees for cremated remains scattered at sea), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-9: Approve third amendment to agreements between the county of Lake and Jones Mortuary, Jones and Lewis Mortuary and Chapel of the Lakes Mortuary (adding transportation fees for indigent deceased residents at the San Francisco Medical Examiner’s Office), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-10: Approve first amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and County of Sacramento for FY 2012/13 forensic pathology services (an increase of $30,000), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-11: Approve second amendment to agreement between the county of Lake and Wilbur H. Dixon dba MGI-Madeira Group International, for preemployment background investigations (an increase of $25,000 and addition of termination date), and authorize the chair to sign.
C-12: Adopt resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-106 to amend the Adopted Budget for FY 2012-13 by canceling Obligated Fund balance to make available for specific appropriations in Budget Unit 2206, decreasing appropriations in BU 2202, and increasing appropriations in BU 2704 (in the amount of $42,180, for the purchase of computer equipment and software and to transfer $59,796 from BU 2022 to BU 2704 for the purchase of dispatch equipment).
C-13: Adopt Resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-106 to amend the Adopted Budget for FY 2012-13 by canceling Obligated Fund balance to make available for specific appropriation in Budget Unit 2214 (in the amount of $34,000, for remodeling the Narcotic Task Force’s facility and ongoing K-9 certification fees).
C-14 Social Services Adopt Resolution amending Resolution No. 2012-107 establishing position allocations for FY 2012/2013, Budget Unit No. 5115, OJT Training (eliminating one Parks Maintenance Worker Trainee and addition one Public Works Worker Trainee position).
Email Elizabeth Larson at
- Details
- Written by: Elizabeth Larson