SALINAS, California - Monterey County District Attorney Jeannine M. Pacioni announced on November 25 that her office completed a review of a case submitted by the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office concerning
suspect Deputy Gaspar Estevez. The District Attorney’s Office determined that proof beyond a
reasonable doubt does not support that Deputy Estevez committed any crime.
During a conversation, an inmate told Deputy Estevez that there are weapons in every housing unit at
the jail. According to Estevez, he told the inmate to turn a weapon over to prove he wasn’t bluffing.
About a week later, the inmate provided Estevez with a five-and-a-half-inch-long inmate-manufactured
weapon, commonly referred to as a shank. At the end of his shift that day, Estevez took the shank home
and put it on his garage shelf.
On November 7—approximately 2 weeks later, according to an inmate who indicated he had
observed the shank exchange—sheriff’s investigators interviewed Estevez. Estevez told the investigators
all of the information recounted above. Estevez claimed that he wanted to investigate shank-making in
the jail, determine what materials are being used, make the jail a safer facility, and show jail officials
“the big picture,” at least in part because there was an opening in the classification unit that he desired.
He also claimed that as time passed, he forgot the shank was still in his garage.
Estevez was cooperative throughout the interview. Although he was read his Miranda rights, he did not
invoke his right to remain silent or request counsel. He admitted he should have booked the shank into
evidence and created a case number. According to the investigation, “As the interview continued,
Estevez remained cooperative and repeatedly consented to searches of his locker in the jail locker room,
his vehicle, his cell phone, and he agreed several times to take us to his house to retrieve the shank.”
No illegal weapons, drugs, or other contraband was found in his locker. Estevez took investigators to his
house. The investigation states, “Estevez voluntarily opened his garage and showed us the shelf in the
garage where the shank was located.”
The investigation did not provide evidence showing that Estevez’s version of events was false.
The Sheriff’s Office submitted 3 charges for filing consideration. One was illegal possession or
manufacture of a weapon in a penal institution. Only an inmate can commit this offense.
Another charge was conspiracy to possess or manufacture a weapon in a penal institution. This crime
requires an agreement between at least 2 persons with the specific intent to commit the target crime.
When an inmate agrees with a deputy to surrender a shank the inmate possesses, that is not an agreement
to commit the target crime. Deputies attempting to recover illegal shanks from cooperative inmates try
to prevent the target crime, not facilitate it. And the District Attorney’s Office found insufficient
evidence for the theory that Estevez and the inmate agreed that the inmate should manufacture a shank.
Estevez did not admit this, and competent evidence did not prove it. Estevez’s acted to remove the shank
from the jail, which is inconsistent with the purposes of a conspiracy whose criminal purpose is an
illegal weapon in a penal institution.
The last crime submitted was destroying or concealing evidence. However, this crime requires that the
shank “is about to be produced in evidence” in a trial or investigation. No investigation was pending at
the time Estevez removed the shank from the jail or placed it in his garage. Once the Sheriff’s Office
investigation commenced, he disclosed the location of the shank and surrendered it upon request. Had he
lied about its location or existence, he could commit this crime, but he did not.
The scope of this review is narrow. It is not to determine whether Estevez violated department policy or
best practices, but rather to determine if he committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The
investigation submitted did not disclose sufficient proof of any crime.
Comments
Post a Comment