District Attorney John Sarsfield will finish reviewing a private
investigator’s report provided by the Jaime De La Cruz camp before
deciding the next step in the criminal probe of the
supervisor-elect and his campaign adviser.
Hollister – District Attorney John Sarsfield will finish reviewing a private investigator’s report provided by the Jaime De La Cruz camp before deciding the next step in the criminal probe of the supervisor-elect and his campaign adviser.
Campaign adviser Ignacio Velazquez hired private investigator Roberto Rivera to interrogate some witnesses previously interviewed as part of the county’s probe of the race.
The De La Cruz camp believes their report shows several witnesses’ testimony from a county investigation, including from a woman they allegedly coerced into voting for De La Cruz, was tainted. Rivera’s interviews with elections officials also reiterates their stance they were informed to handle and return ballots to the elections office.
De La Cruz and Velazquez hope the new report proves their innocence. Though Cruz and his adviser Ruben Lopez say the De La Cruz camp undoubtedly broke the law and that their private investigator’s report holds little credibility.
A few weeks after the March 2 election at the Board of Supervisors’ request, Santa Cruz inspector Aron Tripp conducted an investigation of the supervisor-elect and his adviser. Tripp recommended six felonies for De La Cruz and five for Velazquez for an array of alleged elections violations.
Velazquez, meanwhile, said he gave his report to Sarsfield a week ago. Sarsfield also is awaiting a report from the Secretary of State’s Office, which is conducting its own probe of the election results. He hopes to get the state’s report before making a decision on whether to press charges or convene the criminal grand jury to consider indictments, he said.
“We’re wrapping this thing up,” said Sarsfield, adding he wants it concluded, at the latest, within four to six weeks.
Sarsfield, though, wouldn’t comment on specifics of the new report or the lingering investigation that began in late March after questions arose over the fairness of De La Cruz’s 10-vote victory over incumbent Bob Cruz.
Velazquez hopes the report will lead to Sarsfield dropping the investigation. Sarsfield canceled previously scheduled grand jury hearings in May after the De La Cruz camp filed an embarrassing court motion against him.
It claimed he was biased because of an alleged affair between the prosecutor and a relative of a Cruz supporter, whose political organization spurred many of the allegations against the De La Cruz camp.
Sarsfield then asked the state attorney general’s office if the court motion prejudiced him against the De La Cruz camp. The state gave him the OK to head the probe
Asked if he’s concerned the De La Cruz camp might file another recusal motion if he convenes a grand jury again, Sarsfield said, “I don’t even want to speculate about that.”
Velazquez realizes some people will criticize the objectivity of the private investigator he hired. But he said the report is not prejudiced, pointing out that it includes testimony from witnesses who believe De La Cruz broke the law.
Rivera, who speaks English and Spanish, has been a licensed private investigator since 1998 and has 10 years of investigating experience, he said Monday.
“The report is obviously unbiased,” Velazquez said. “He (Rivera) put down everything. The guy (Felipe Sanchez) still says Jaime was electioneering.”
De La Cruz thinks the private investigator’s report shows that Tripp’s probe was flawed, he said. Cruz, however, doesn’t believe the new report will help exonerate De La Cruz and Velazquez.
“They’re going to come out with the same thing,” Cruz said assuredly. “How can they deny some of the things they did in that (Tripp) report?”
Lopez, Cruz’s campaign manager, said the De La Cruz camp should accept the contents of the Tripp report.
“Anything that comes out and points the finger at Ignacio and Jaime is not going to be satisfactory to them,” Lopez said.
Sanchez, who claims he saw De La Cruz illegally campaigning near a poll, is one of seven residents or elections office employees whose interviews Rivera summarized in his report.
Rivera questioned only a segment of the witnesses – from the Tripp report – who corroborated claims that De La Cruz and Velazquez broke elections laws. The allegations include illegal handling of absentee ballots, electioneering near a polling place and coercing a voter.
Some of the people the private investigator interviewed include the following:
n Monica Vasquez: Tripp’s report says Vasquez, whose mother is a Cruz supporter, said she felt pressured to vote for De La Cruz after he and Velazquez gave her a ride to a polling place, which is legal. Tripp recommended felony charges for coercing a voter.
Rivera’s report says Vasquez – who previously planned to vote for Cruz, and then instead voted for De La Cruz – said she wasn’t sure why she made that decision. She thought she did so “possibly” because De La Cruz and Velazquez were nice, or that she felt compelled since they offered her a ride, according to the report.
n Violeta Sanchez: Tripp’s report says Sanchez, the wife of Felipe Sanchez, claims she saw De La Cruz electioneering within the 100-foot zone prohibited by the law.
Rivera’s report says Sanchez was not sure “whether or not he was properly present or conversing legitimately,” according to the documents.
n Elections supervisor Kim Hawk: Tripp’s report says Hawk acknowledged the elections office advised Velazquez to return ballots to the office, which is illegal for a campaign adviser. Rivera’s report also says Hawk told Velazquez to return the ballots at the elections office.
The report also makes mention of some witnesses being Cruz supporters or having ties to the Cruz camp. Velazquez has claimed Cruz supporters have been behind all the allegations.
Cruz said Monday his campaign did nothing wrong.
“There is nothing on Bob Cruz,” he said. “I’ll put my life on it. I live a very simple, simple life.”
