Federal Jury Finds Oregon Cop Fabricated Evidence; Plaintiffs Awarded $30,000

A federal jury awarded an Oregon family $30,000 against a police officer who fabricated evidence in 2010. After the verdict, prosecutors imposed the “law enforcement death penalty,” dismissing the officer’s cases and refusing to use him as a witness.

Diego Mata-Gonzalez (Diego Sr.) and Lilia Lopez-Guzman immigrated to the United States from Mexico in 1986. Diego Sr. speaks limited English but Guzman speaks only Spanish. They live in Cornelius, Oregon, with their 9- and 13-year old sons Johnny and Vladimir. Their eldest son, Diego Jr., did not live at home.

During a January 27, 2010 investigation of a gang shooting, two witnesses identified Diego Jr., as a suspect. Cornelius Police Officer Miguel Monico was in charge of the investigation.

On February 4, 2010, police searched the home of Diego Jr.’s parents for weapons. The family was not home when the warrant was executed.

During the search, Monico found a bag of white powder, some small paper cups, and a notebook. Monico characterized the notebook as a “ledger” of “drug-related” transactions, even though the notebook made no express or implied reference to any such transactions.

Noticing a shrine to various Catholic icons including Santa Muerte, Monico claimed that Santa Muerte is considered “the patron saint of drug dealers.” He concluded that the “shrine” to Santa Muerte was all but conclusive evidence that drug dealers lived in the home.

Monico claimed that he conducted a narcotics field test on the white powder, and it tested positive for cocaine. He also claimed that cocaine dealers use small paper cups similar to those found, to measure out cocaine for their customers. No other evidence of drug use, packaging or selling was discovered.

Monico returned to the residence later that day on the pretext that he may have left his notebook at the scene. Diego Sr., believes Monico actually returned to intimidate and threaten him; a belief supported by Monico ultimately locating his “missing” notebook in his own pocket.

Diego Sr. told Monico that the white powder was not cocaine, but rather soap made of eggshell powder used for cleansing before religious rituals. He showed Monico a similar bag of white powder, labeled as “cascarilla,” a powder made largely of pulverized eggshells.

Ignoring Diego Sr.’s claims of innocence, Monico threatened that he had “the power to do anything he wanted,” including deport Diego Sr.

Monico later claimed that Diego Sr., confessed to him that the substance in the bag was cocaine, that it had been for his own use and that it was “old” and he had “forgotten” that it was in the house.

Monico performed a second field test on the substance a few days after the search, again claiming that it tested positive for cocaine.

Solely on the basis of Monico’s report, a children’s services investigator considered removing Vladimir and Johnny from the home. Accompanied by Monico and other officers, the investigator went to the home on February 25, 2010.

When Diego Sr., became upset by Monico’s presence, the investigator believed the allegations of criminal activity were true. On that basis, she removed the children from the home and placed them in the foster care system.

Monico then arrested Diego Sr., for possession of cocaine with intent to sell on February 26, 2010. He was released from custody the next day, on the condition that he not return to the home or have contact with his children while the charges were pending against him.

Defense counsel repeatedly requested lab testing of the white powder. Those tests were finally ordered on April 15, 2010 and performed on May 13, 2010.

When the substance did not test positive for cocaine, the criminal charges were immediately dismissed. Vladimir and Johnny were returned to their parents later the same day.

The family brought federal suit against Monico, the City and several other defendants. On April 10, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Paul Papak denied Monico and the City summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ false arrest and malicious prosecution claims.

“In light of the now established and undisputed fact that the seized substance was not cocaine, the accuracy of Monico’s testimony to the contrary and his good faith in purportedly subjectively relying on Gonzalez’ ‘confession’ in obtaining an arrest warrant are called into very serious question,” Papak found. “It is highly implausible that Gonzalez would confess to law enforcement officials that a powder he knew to be cascarilla was in fact a controlled substance. On the current evidentiary record, I therefore conclude that a finder-of-fact could reasonably determine that Gonzalez did not confess in the manner testified to by Monico under oath, and that Monico entirely fabricated his account of Gonzalez’ confession.”

“In light of the grounds ... for doubting Monico’s credibility as a witness,” Papak also found that “a finder of fact could reasonably conclude on the evidence of record that the first of the two field tests described in Monico’s testimony never took place.” See: Mata-Gonzalez v. Monico, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138960 (D. Or. 2013).

Following Papak’s findings, the Washington County District Attorney’s Office placed Monico on an “officer alert list,” so prosecutors would know of potential issues if he was called to testify in a criminal prosecution.

In September 2014, a federal jury awarded plaintiffs $30,000, after finding, as Papak suggested, that Monico fabricated the evidence against them.

On October 3, 2014, District Attorney Bob Hermann informed Sheriff Pat Garrett that prosecutors dismissed two of Monico’s cases and will no longer use him as a witness, following the verdict.

“My office lacks confidence that, as a witness, Deputy Monico can withstand the strict scrutiny necessary for law enforcement professionals,” Hermann wrote. He also alerted defense attorneys and defendants with pending Monico cases, of the federal jury’s findings and verdict.

Monico was placed on paid administrative leave and he may lose his career, said his attorney, Dan Thenell. Let’s hope so.

Source:The Oregonian

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

Related legal case