Lyndsay Winkley | San Diego Union-Tribune
The lawyer for the younger girl who stated three former San Diego State College soccer gamers raped her at a celebration final yr filed a lawsuit this week accusing town of failing to launch paperwork that he says ought to have been given to his shopper beneath state legislation.
In keeping with the go well with filed in San Diego Superior Court docket on Wednesday, legal professional Dan Gilleon requested dozens of paperwork linked to his shopper’s civil case — first on Aug. 19 and once more on Sept. 6. Gilleon requested for all take a look at outcomes and pictures taken through the rape examination the younger girl underwent, all search warrants served through the investigation, and all statements from witnesses and potential suspects, amongst different issues.
Gilleon made the requests beneath the California Public Data Act. Below the legislation, the general public has entry to many paperwork produced and maintained by state and native governments. Nevertheless, there are exceptions, particularly when police departments are concerned, specialists say.
In paperwork supplied by Gilleon, the Police Division cited a number of of those exemptions when it denied the legal professionals request.
Gilleon’s shopper stated in a separate lawsuit filed final month that the rape occurred at a Faculty Space dwelling on Oct. 17. She was 17 years outdated on the time of the incident.
The go well with alleges that former Buffalo Payments punter Matt Araiza, then 21, had intercourse with the teenager in a aspect yard of the residence earlier than bringing her right into a bed room the place a gaggle of males took turns assaulting her. Zavier Leonard and Nowlin “Pa’a” Ewaliko had been additionally named within the lawsuit, and are now not members of the faculty’s workforce.
Nobody has been charged in reference to the incident.
The division supplied a redacted copy of the preliminary crime report the younger girl filed the day after she stated the rape occurred, in response to paperwork Gilleon shared with the Union-Tribune. A lot of the report’s contents had already been shared by the younger girl, now 18, with members of the media and within the lawsuit she filed in August.
The division additionally supplied a short abstract of the DNA testing that had been finished through the investigation. It stated that DNA profiles of a number of assailants had been recognized from the rape examination and different items of proof and that none had been present in a Division of Justice DNA database of convicted offenders. Araiza’s lawyer, Kerry Armstrong, stated his shopper voluntarily submitted his DNA to police final week.
The most recent lawsuit argues that the knowledge the Police Division supplied fell method in need of what it was required to launch beneath state legislation.
“The Metropolis’s and SDPD’s willingness to violate public data legislation is infamous, however on this case, it’s downright inhuman,” Gilleon stated Friday. “A younger gang-rape sufferer shouldn't should beg the police to observe the legislation.”
Gilleon stated his shopper has a powerful curiosity within the investigation and prosecution of her case, and added that for a lot of survivors of a traumatic occasion, understanding precisely what occurred might be an essential a part of their restoration.
Police officers stated Friday that they may not touch upon pending litigation, nonetheless, within the paperwork Gilleon shared, police officers stated their resolution to withhold paperwork the legal professional had requested stemmed from a number of exemptions supplied beneath state legislation.
“California legislation sadly imposes a variety of important boundaries to full transparency in the case of legislation enforcement,” stated David Loy, authorized director for the First Modification Coalition.
For instance, the state’s Public Data Act requires that police companies launch salient particulars about investigations to crime victims — together with statements from folks concerned in an incident and the statements of witnesses — until disclosing that data would impede the profitable completion of an investigation.
It’s one of many exemptions San Diego police officers cited in response to Gilleon’s request.
Loy stated as a result of the Police Division submitted its investigation to the county District Lawyer’s Workplace for assessment final month, there’s “definitely an argument” that the investigation is full.
“And you may’t endanger the character of an investigation that's already accomplished,” he stated.
A lot of the language governing the discharge of public data in state legislation is topic to interpretation, Loy stated. Due to that, it’s essential for departments to not solely element the exemption they're citing with the intention to withhold data that might in any other case be made public, but in addition how that exemption applies particularly on this case.
The District Lawyer’s Workplace is constant to assessment the Police Division’s investigation into the incident, and, to this point, nobody was been arrested in reference to the case.
San Diego State College — which was criticized for failing to shortly begin an administrative inquiry into the allegations of misconduct by pupil athletes — can be investigating the incident. Police officers stated they requested the college to carry off on trying into the matter to guard the integrity of the division’s investigation.
The varsity’s inquiry is ongoing.
Employees author Teri Figueroa contributed to this story.
This story initially appeared in San Diego Union-Tribune.
©2022 The San Diego Union-Tribune. Go to sandiegouniontribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content material Company, LLC.