The court has once again delayed Santa Clara Vice Mayor Anthony Becker’s perjury trial to Monday, Aug. 12, but the judge told the defense it would be the last time.
Judge Elizabeth Peterson granted the defense’s motion for continuance Friday, but rejected the proposed October date, giving them a little more than two weeks to be ready for trial.
Deputy District Attorney Jason Malinsky accused the defense of dragging its heels, saying the delay up to this point has not been because of the prosecution. Becker’s lawyers, Chris Montoya, a public defender, and Grant Fondo, a pro-bono attorney, have had ample time since Becker was indicted in April 2023, he said, and they are taking an “inordinate” amount of time.
“They suddenly started to investigate a few months ago,” Malinsky said.
Montoya disputed that the defense was responsible for the delay, saying that he has many violent crimes on his schedule and while the prosecution had ample time prior to him being assigned to the case to prepare. Meanwhile, the defense is still sifting through much discovery, including a mountain of digital files and awaiting the transcribing of audio files.
Failing to give ample time for the defense to pore over the material would violate Becker’s right to due process, Montoya said.
While the judge granted the motion, she also noted that much of the discovery, in her view, “seems wholly irrelevant” to the case.
Earlier in the day, another judge, Benjamin Williams, granted several subpoenas the defense presented. Those subpoenas include Council Member Kathy Watanabe, her husband to whom she has admitted leaking the report, Mayor Lisa Gillmor, Gillmor-ally Jude Barry and political organization Stand Up For Santa Clara.
Becker’s lawyers also detailed a bit of their intended trial tactic. The lawyers believe the District Attorney’s office is selectively prosecuting Becker. Essentially, they believe others, namely Gillmor and Watanabe, are also guilty of the same crimes but are not being prosecuted for them.
While Williams would not approve any discovery toward that end, he seemed to soften on the defense’s other tactic. Montoya argued that Becker knew the report had been leaked to others, so when he testified that he didn’t leak the report, he did not lie.
Williams conceded a bit, allowing for the subpoenas.
“To commit perjury, it has to be a knowingly false statement,” Williams said.
Montoya said Gillmor’s records is relevant since the investigation revealed that she deleted text messages and that her internet searches showed she looked up the penalty for contempt of court and other seemingly related laws. All this was after she denied leaking the report.
Malinsky renewed objections that the argument that others leaked the report does not absolve Becker of his duty to maintain confidentiality has no teeth. Further, he said, when interviewed, Becker made no such claims.
“He testified to a suspicion, not a knowledge,” Malinsky said.
While Williams refused to grant any subpoenas on the grounds of selective prosecution, he said that a “misapprehension of the law” was a viable defense. However, as per a previous ruling, Williams said he would not compel anything falling under the umbrella of Civil Grand Jury materials.
View Comments (3)
Once again, thank you for your excellent coverage of public affairs in our city.
It is well worth remembering by all of the public (including the judges presiding over the upcoming trial of DA Rosen's accusations against Council Member Becker) that, since 1790, the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has EXPRESSLY guaranteed, among other things, that ""[i]n all criminal prosecutions, . . . the accused shall enjoy the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor." This CONSTITUTIONAL mandate is greater than any statutory provision (including any of the statutory discovery procedures which are typically used in civil damages lawsuits). It is a constitutional imperative about which no judge should be stingy.
This case involves the vital liberty interests of a duly elected member of our City Council. If his respected attorneys say that they need more time to provide him with competent assistance of counsel at the trial against him -- another one of his EXPRESSLY guaranteed constitutional rights under the Sixth Amendment -- then that time should be provided unbegrudgingly especially in this strange type of case which has rarely been brought involving, as it does, various individuals, organizations, political conflicts, press groups, and loads of documents/tapes. (It is not a gas station holdup.)
Secondly, the accused in every case is entitled, under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to be protected by the Court against any Selective Prosecutions based on what side of a political, racial, religious, gender divide he or she might happen to be on. Since the accusations in this case involve political figures, political proceedings, and various press coverages, all necessary discovery should be allowed by the judges -- not only in the interests of Council Member Becker (as important as those interests are) -- but also the numerous important public interests of our City and County which are stake in this matter.
I didn't know about others, but I'm looking forward to seeing depositions from Watanabe and Gillmor entered into the court record. Watanabe's spouse will probably claim marital privilege but I don't see her being able to wiggle out of it
To bad the special advisor to the mayor is not on the list.
Good point about the Special advisor. Maybe that person should be added. plus a few others. Maybe they should check pizza orders and see if there are secret messages sent that way to him? Or in pizza box deliveries? maybe thats how they are passing messages?