The perjury trial of a Santa Clara official has yet to commence as defense lawyers seek more information on other city officials.
Chris Montoya, public defender for Santa Clara Councilmember Anthony Becker, filed a brief on Aug. 9 aiming to gather evidence allegedly showing Santa Clara Mayor Lisa Gillmor may have received an advance copy of a draft Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report released in June. The defense wants to show Becker, indicted for perjury in April 2023 after allegedly lying about leaking a draft 2022 civil grand jury report, is not the only city leader to allegedly leak documents.
Becker, who will appear in court Friday morning, pleaded not guilty to multiple charges in May 2023. Based on another brief filed July 24, Montoya suspects Gillmor may have also leaked the 2022 report.
The 2022 grand jury report, “Unsportsmanlike Conduct,” centered on the 49ers’ political presence and power in Santa Clara city politics. At the time, 49ers officials called it a “hatchet job,” and the five councilmembers scrutinized in the report, including Becker, said it was riddled with misinformation.
Whether Gillmor leaked the report is up in the air. Political opponents suspect her of leaking it to the Santa Clara Police Officers Association, who quoted the report in a website blasting the same five councilmembers before the report was publicly released.
Montoya is looking for more information about a more recent grand jury report — “Irreconcilable Differences,” published by the civil grand jury on June 12. Following its release, Santa Clara Councilmember Suds Jain filed a public records request for any messages sent by or to Gillmor on city or personal devices during council meetings on May 28 and June 4 of this year. Gillmor produced a handful of text messages and two photos of the report on her computer in response to the request.
The photos of the report were supposedly from June 4, before the rest of the city council received it on June 5 and before it was published on June 12. Montoya said in the July 24 brief that the photos being taken before the rest of council received the report meant someone on the civil grand jury had leaked them to Gillmor and that she had a “mole.” Gillmor’s attorneys refuted that and said the photos were taken after the report published and after June 4, according to Montoya’s Aug. 9 brief. That was also supported by the images’ metadata.
Montoya argued in the brief that this demonstrates Gillmor “is not credible and any metadata information she may submit to this Court regarding the screenshots cannot be relied upon.”
The brief concludes that Gillmor should be subpoenaed to verify her documents. Gillmor did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office and other parties suggest the defense is using broad subpoenas to fish for information, including information that doesn’t pertain to the case at hand. Deputy District Attorney Jason Malinsky filed a motion to quash one of Montoya’s subpoenas directed at the DA’s office regarding a separate 2020 grand jury investigation.
In the brief filed July 24, Montoya argued the potential of other leaks is relevant to Becker’s case, because that would mean the report’s contents were already publicly known. That brief was filed in response to multiple oppositions to subpoenas.
“The Defense is not certain what the truth is — whether Mayor Gillmor improperly received a copy of the Irreconcilable Differences Grand Jury report on June 4, (2024), or whether she was dishonest and abused the PRA process,” the brief reads.
There is a hearing on the subpoena tomorrow at 9 a.m. and the next scheduling hearing is set for Sept. 9 at 8:31 a.m.
Contact B. Sakura Cannestra at [email protected] or @SakuCannestra on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.