Granite Bay mansion owner apologizes for party during COVID pandemic

The owner of a Granite Bay mansion has issued an apology after a New Year’s Eve party drew more attendees than he expected.

Gabriel Watters owns the mansion where hundreds of people attended a New Year’s Eve party last week. The party became a viral sensation after photos and videos from inside were posted to YouTube and SnapChat, which drew condemnation on other social media platforms after people began noticing many of the attendants weren’t wearing masks or social distancing.

The party has been deemed a “super spreader” event by critics, though there’s no evidence that anyone at the event had the novel coronavirus COVID-19 or contracted it in connection with the event.

Still, Watters said the party was supposed to be a small affair and quickly ballooned in size after word of the event spread on social media.

In a statement released through his attorney Mark Reichel, Watters apologized for the event and said he worked hard to end it once he learned about what was taking place at his mansion:

“Mr. Watters had invited close friends to a planned small gathering at the very large house for New Year’s Eve. The notoriety of the house caused those invited to broadcast the party and invitation across social media. He never intended for this event to be this big and he apologizes for how things got out of hand.”

At one point during the party, deputies with the Placer County Sheriff’s Office were dispatched following a noise complaint by a neighbor in the gated Los Lagos community. Deputies asked participants to turn down the music but did not make any arrests or citations. The sheriff’s office told a local newspaper that around 100 people were in attendance.

Placer County is part of the Sacramento area region, which is under a mandatory stay-at-home order issued by state health officials in early December. The order prohibits individuals from non-essential travel and in-person gatherings. The party as depicted in the videos and photos posted to social media would qualify as “non-essential” under the health order.

Click or tap here to read more at CBS13 Sacramento

Breonna Taylor: Bad law and biased prosecution led to disappointing outcome for many

A grand jury indictment connected to the fatal shooting of a 26-year-old ambulance technician proved disappointing for activists who for months have called for criminal charges against the officers accused of killing her.

Earlier this week, officials in Lousiville, Ky. announced an officer had been indicted by a grand jury for allegedly firing through a door and window, with bullets from his gun striking the wall of an apartment neighboring that of Breonna Taylor.

Taylor was killed after being struck by crossfire as officers executed a “no-knock” search warrant on her apartment where she and her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, lived.

The primary targets of the police investigation were two men suspected of selling drugs out of a home more than 10 miles away. The men did not live at Taylor’s apartment, but police suspected one of them occasionally visited her home.

On March 13, officers used a battering ram to break down Taylor’s door. Startled, Walker assumed someone was breaking into their apartment and fired a single shot, which struck and injured an officer.

Officers returned fire. At least five bullets struck Taylor. She was pronounced dead at the scene.

An investigation into what happened that night took place only after intense public pressure from activists in the United States and elsewhere around the world, demands that grew following several other fatal police encounters, including that of Minneapolis resident George Floyd.

On Wednesday, Kentucky’s attorney general announced there would be no charges against the officers involved in the March shooting that led to Taylor’s death because his agency concluded they acted appropriately during the incident.

Legal experts disagree.

“I think this one is a slighted, biased prosecution,” Sacramento criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel said in an interview with FOX40 News. “In this case, there’s a lot that was not given to the grand jury…some of the reports were backdated, were altered and there were complete lies in some of the reports.”

Mark said existing law in Kentucky tends to favor police officers in criminal probes like this one, but a prosecutor still has the ability to act independently of a grand jury and bring charges if they feel there is sufficient evidence of a crime.

“You can say, well, look, the grand jury didn’t do this, but I’m a prosecutor, I’m going to file a criminal complaint,” Mark said. “With a certain period of time, [suspects are] entitled to a preliminary hearing…where a judge reviews the evidence.”

As far as the state’s criminal investigation goes, Mark said he believes Wednesday’s announcement to be the end of the line there. But federal prosecutors could launch their own civil rights investigation into the death, though any such action would depend on the outcome of the November election.

“That could happen, but it will only happen if the Democrats take the White House…with a new attorney general,” Mark said. “Attorney General Barr has indicated he will not get involved in this case.”

Click or tap here for the full story from FOX40 News

AirBNB sues guest after shooting erupts at Sacramento house party

Short-term vacation rental website AirBNB will sue a Sacramento-area customer after a house party at one of its vacation rental homes ended in a violent shooting last week.

The pending lawsuit marks the first time AirBNB has taken legal action against one of its customers in connection with their service.

AirBNB connects homeowners who want to rent rooms to vacationers on a short-term basis. Some homeowners list their entire property for rent on the website, something the service allows.

But what AirBNB doesn’t allow is for customers to book homes for “open-invite parties” or other ragers that aren’t sanctioned by a property owner. The company has cracked down on renting homes for parties since the start of the coronavirus health pandemic.

This week, AirBNB provided media outlets with a statement that accused the Sacramento-area customer of booking a home in the Arden-Arcade neighborhood under false pretenses. The company said the guest, who was not named in their statement, violated numerous county health codes as well as the company’s community standards policy.

“AirBNB has removed the guest from the platform,” the statement said.

That won’t be the last step in the saga: This week, AirBNB said it would initiate legal proceedings against the customer and donate money received through the lawsuit to a Sacramento-area non-violence organization.

Legal expert Mark Reichel said the pending lawsuit comes at a time when AirBNB is preparing to file an initial public offering or I.P.O., and that such a filing normally requires them to have a squeaky-clean image.

“AirBNB is being very proactive in this case and that is an image issue for the company,” Mark told local TV station CBS13 News. “They are planning to go public very soon, and they want to come off as a very clean, by-the-book type of company.”

Mark said the pending lawsuit is also intended to shield AirBNB from certain types of liability in anticipation of separate lawsuits being filed against the company by as many as three victims who were reportedly shot during the party.

“They are getting ready for the rounds of lawsuits that are coming, as if to say, we agree, we’ve already sued this guy, we had nothing to do with it” Mark said.

Click or tap here to read the full story from CBS13 News

Charges could be brought for deliberately coughing on people during COVID pandemic

Deliberately coughing on other individuals could lead to criminal charges if the victim becomes infected with a deadly disease like the novel coronavirus COVID-19, according to legal expert Mark Reichel.

Late last month, police in Nevada County said they were trying to track down two individuals who are accused of doing just that.

In at least one case, a woman said two unknown individuals were upset after she encouraged them to wear face masks while shopping at a local grocery store. The two people eventually did put on masks, but one of the two chased the woman into the parking lot of the store, started shouting at her and made coughing noises.

The woman reported the incident to the Grass Valley Police Department. An investigation is now under way into what happened. Officers said if the woman is able to identify the man and it can be proven he acted the way she described, the man could face misdemeanor assault charges.

In an interview with FOX40 News, Mark said that might not be the worst of it for people who deliberately cough on or otherwise try to infect people.

“If it’s an offensive conduct that puts you in reasonable fear of harm, that’s an assault,” Mark said. “If it can be proven somehow that they got it from that person, that they got it from that exposure and they die, the question is do we have a murder case on our hands?”

In California, state law requires individuals to wear face masks, take social distancing measures and engage in other safety practices to curb the spread of COVID-19. More than 10,000 people in California have died from the disease since state officials began tracking it in early March.

Click or tap here to read the full story from FOX40.com

Celebrity tweet puts new focus on Stephon Clark shooting

One tweet from actress and fashion model Kim Kardashian-West has shined an international spotlight on the case of Stephon Clark, an unarmed man who was fatally shot by Sacramento police during an encounter two years ago.

Earlier this month, Kardashian-West tweeted about the March 2018 case to her 6.5 million followers on the social network, urging her fans to sign a petition demanding justice for the man’s killing.

“Kim Kardashian understands that the officers who killed my brother in my grandmother’s backyard while he was unarmed should be held accountable,” Stevante Clark, the brother of Stephon Clark, told CBS13 News in an interview.

Clark was shot as he fled from police officers who were investigating a report of a man looking into car windows. Police said they had reason to believe Clark was armed when he was shot; what was thought to be a firearm turned out to be Clark’s cell phone.

Last March, Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert declined to file charges against the two officers connected to the shooting.

In an interview with FOX40 News in May, Sacramento defense attorney Mark Reichel said county prosecutors rarely charge police officers because their positions are elected and cases brought against police officers can be difficult to win.

“It’s better [for county prosecutors] to not bring it than to lose a high-profile case and, obviously, officer-involved killings are always high-profile,” Mark said.

More than a year later, police shootings of unarmed men — particularly those who are Black — have captured the attention of a nation. Following the death of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man who was killed by a police officer in Minneapolis, police accountability has become a rallying cry in large cities and small towns across the United States.

It has also led some activists and celebrities, like Kardashian-West, to ask for justice in cases with a copious amount of unfinished business.

“I think Kim Kardashian’s involvement will help this substantially,” Mark told CBS13 News in an interview. “I think this is a major platform. Stephon Clark’s murder is well known around American anyways and when you add Kim Kardashian to that, that platform is spread out far and wide.”

Mark said if voters choose a different district attorney in the next election, that prosecutor could elect to bring charges against the two officers. Federal officials could also bring charges, Mark explained, because “there is actually no double jeopardy between the state and the federal government.”

Click here to read the full story from CBS13 News

Sacramento police reform measures don’t go far enough, legal experts say

A series of police reform measures approved by the Sacramento City Council last week are small steps in the right direction, but the city still has a lot of work that needs to be done and shouldn’t be lauded for such minor changes, legal experts argued on Wednesday.

The reforms were prompted by calls from local activists as part of a national movement following the death of George Floyd, an unarmed black man who was killed during a police encounter by a white Minneapolis police officer.

Since then, officials in towns small and large throughout the country have looked internally at what can be done to fix the fractured system of policing.

n Sacramento, city leaders passed a series of measures that, among other things, reallocated funds away from the Sacramento Police Department toward other community initiatives; banned the use of choke holds during most police encounters; and paved the way for the creation of an independent inspector general who would be tasked with the responsibility of reviewing allegations of police misconduct and abuse of force.

Legal experts in Sacramento said the measures were a long time coming — and should have come a lot sooner.

“The policy proposals from [Sacramento Mayor Darrel Steinberg] and city officials are much delayed and hardly reform,” Elizabeth Kim, the head of the National Lawyers Guild in Sacramento, told the Davis Vanguard in an interview.

Other steps need to be taken by the city, Kim said, including an acknowledgement that so-called “non-lethal” force approved in most cases is, in fact, extremely dangerous and can be lethal for the subjects of police encounters.

Criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel agreed, pointing out the inequities between ordinary citizens and law enforcement officials.

“Lawfully, [citizens] cannot resort to force if someone steals their car, their identity, or assaults their family,” Mark said. “But the police have that lawful right — the right to use force if needed.”

Mark said it was clear that Sacramento officers had been enabled to use that force because of the city’s inaction for a long time.

Click or tap here to read the full story at the Davis Vanguard

Businesses can legally refuse customers who aren’t wearing face masks — but there are some exceptions

A Ceres, California woman is upset at her gym after she says she was kicked out for refusing to wear a mask.

Sara Fontana is a member of InShape Health Clubs, a California chain of gyms and fitness centers. During a recent visit, she said she was confronted by management who told her state law required her to wear a mask.

Fontana complained, saying she was exempt from the mask mandate because she has asthma, a recognized medical condition. Despite this, she said she was asked to leave.

The legal confusion over state-imposed mask mandates has generated a significant amount of public confusion, with some people claiming the government is “infringing” on their rights by forcing them to wear a mask in the middle of an international health crisis.

One group calling itself the “Freedom to Breath Agency” even started selling cards online that claimed the bearer is entitled to an exemption from mask mandates because of the Americans with Disabilities Act, prompting the Federal Trade Commission to issue a rare statement saying the cards were fake and the information printed on them misleading and false.

“Seen cards that say you don’t have to wear a mask because of a disability?” the FTC’s warning says. “They have the Department of Justice…seal, but they’re not from the federal government. DOJ has said not to rely on the information in the cards.”

Information from the Centers for Disease Control says wearing a cloth or other type of mask is shown to be effective in combatting the novel coronavirus COVID-19 because they “reduce the spray of droplets when worn [correctly] over the nose and mouth.”

But the CDC also says cloth face coverings shouldn’t be worn by a certain group of people, including children who are under the age of two years old or anyone who has a legitimate medical condition where using a cloth mask would be difficult.

Following CDC guidance and similar advice from local health officials, California adopted those exemptions and others when it mandated the wearing of cloth masks in public and indoor businesses last month.

So why was Fontana kicked out of her local gym?

Sacramento legal expert Mark Reichel said a business can legally ask someone to leave for not following the state mask mandate if a person can’t back up their claim of a medical exemption with some kind of proof.

“The burden is on [the customer] to prove their exemption is legitimate and back it up with medical paperwork,” Mark told CBS13 News.

If a business makes other accommodations for a customer who claims they can’t wear a mask, the customer can be asked to leave if they don’t accept that offer.

In this case, InShape Health Clubs is likely in the clear because it informed guests last month that they wouldn’t be allowed to access a gym without a face covering, and it provides an avenue for members to contact their local gym’s manager or send an email to InShape’s corporate office to request an accommodation because of a disability.

In a statement to CBS13 News, InShape said it extended the same offer to Fontana, but she refused.

“We offered [Fontana], as we do with all members, an opportunity to work with us on finding an accommodation to keep her safe and all members around her safe,” InShape Health Clubs CEO Francesca Schuler said in a statement to CBS13 News. “But she chose to not take advantage of it which then could place other members in the club at risk.”

InShape told the news outlet it has chosen not to cancel Fontana’s membership and wants to work with her in the future toward a solution that will keep her and other guests safe.

Click or tap here to read the full story from CBS13 News