Paso Robles News|Friday, March 29, 2024
You are here: Home » Top Stories » Update: County rejects claims of SLO protesters filed against district attorney
  • Follow Us!

Update: County rejects claims of SLO protesters filed against district attorney 

BLM protestors file charges against DA

–Legal counsel for the County of San Luis Obispo on Tuesday rejected the claims of Black Lives Matter protestors against San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow. Tianna Arata, Sam Grocott, and Robert Lastra filed claims with the county last month in excess of $10,000 each for allegations of civil rights violations, racial discrimination, and defamation.

The county’s law firm Carl Warren & Company replied to the three claimants: “Notice is hereby given that claim, which you presented to the County Administration Office… was rejected. Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six months from the date this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.”

The reply continued, “It should be noted that if a court finds that a legal action against a governmental entity, including the County of San Luis Obispo is frivolous, without merit and/or not brought and/or maintained in good faith and reasonable cause, the County will have no alternative but to vigorously pursue its rights to recover all of its expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees associated with the defense of such litigation.”

Read details of the claims below.


Original report Feb. 1, 2021:

Three SLO protesters file claims against district attorney

–Three defendants charged with crimes related to Black Lives Matter protests in San Luis Obispo last summer recently filed claims against San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow. The three protesters filing the claims are Tianna Arata, Sam Grocott, and Robert Lastra. The claims were filed on Jan. 19-20. The amount asked for each claim is filled out as “Exceed $10,000 – unlimited civil case.”

Arata’s claim states she “was charged by District Attorney Dow on Sept. 2, 2020, based on bias and racial discrimination.” She alleges, “violations of her civil rights under federal and state laws.” The claim states, “Arata has received death threats, loss of income, had her named defamed in the public, had to essentially hide and end her day to day existence based on the reckless, unlawful prosecution by the County of San Luis Obispo County.”

Tianna Arata. Image from Instagram

Tianna Arata. Image from Instagram

Grocott’s claim states he “was charged by DA Dow on Oct. 16, 2020, based on bias and racial discrimination. Grocott has received loss of income, defamation of his reputation and character in the public, unlawful prosecution by San Luis Obispo County.”

Lastra’s claim states, “On July 21, 2020, SLO Police and CHP falsified police reports and public statements to vilify Black Lives Matter protesters, including Mr. Lastra, and to cover up the attempted murder of said protesters by known / ID’d driver of BMW. DA Dan Dow and his office then filed malicious and unconstitutionally discriminatory criminal charges against Mr. Lastra.”

The claim continues, “Mr. Lastra has suffered irreparable damage to his reputation and character in the public, suffered defamation, slander, and libel from public statements of SLO law enforcement and District Attorney/DA’s Office, as well as the malicious and discriminatory prosecution of Mr. Lastra based upon knowingly false police reports and statements. Damages also inclusive of lost wages and housing.”

The claims are related to the county’s prosecution of them for their actions during a July 21, 2020, protest in San Luis Obispo when protesters marched onto Highway 101 and stopped traffic.

The cases against them are stalled after Superior Court Judge Matthew Guerrero disqualified the district attorney’s office from prosecuting the case. The district attorney’s office and the state attorney general’s are appealing that ruling.

The claims only present one side of the story. The district attorney did not reply to a request for comment by press time. A spokesperson for the DA said the office will provide its rejections of the claims when they are served, which is expected on Tuesday, Jan. 2.

Administrative claims, like these, are required prior to filing lawsuits. If a government agency rejects the claim, then a lawsuit may be filed by the petitioner.

Read the claims against the DA here

Share To Social Media

Comments

About the author: Publisher Scott Brennan

Scott Brennan is the publisher of this newspaper and founder of Access Publishing. Follow him on Twitter, LinkedIn, or follow his blog.