SLO County DA says there’s ‘no conflict’ after being disqualified from Tianna Arata case
San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow pushed back against a San Luis Obispo Superior Court judge’s decision Friday to remove his office from a controversial prosecution against seven Black Lives Matter protesters, saying “there is absolutely no conflict” preventing him from continuing on in the case.
“While I have been personally attacked on many occasions since the arrests in these cases, I have continued to conduct my duty in a manner that is above reproach without bending to popular opinion and public pressure,” Dow wrote in a statement Friday afternoon.
Earlier Friday morning, Superior Court Judge Matthew Guerrero granted a motion by the defense attorneys for protest organizer Tianna Arata to recuse not only Dow — who the defense argued was politically biased against the Black Lives Matter movement —but also his entire agency from the case.
Instead, the California Attorney General’s Office may take the case, should the agency choose to do so.
Guerrero found that, in addition to a series of public comments by Dow and the district attorney’s affiliations with groups opposed to the social justice movement, Dow’s wife sent a re-election campaign email in September seeking financial donations from Dow’s supporters less than 48 hours after Dow publicly announced he filed charges against Arata.
“(The email) established a clear conflict of interest,” Guerrero said in court Friday. “(By) delivering this fundraising email to potentially tens of thousands of people immediately after filing the charges, Mr. Dow sought political and professional benefit and campaign contributions in conjunction with the prosecution of the above-entitled cases.”
In his statement, Dow said he “respectfully and strongly” disagrees with Guerrero‘s findings and “decision to recuse the district attorney from prosecuting criminal activity that occurred during this summer’s protests.”
“There is absolutely no conflict in this case,” he said in the statement.
The charges in the four-defendant case stem from a July 21 protest in which demonstrators marched on Highway 101 in San Luis Obispo, blocking traffic for less than an hour.
Arata, 20, and her three co-defendants — Marcus Montgomery, 24, Joshua Powell, 23, and Amman Asfaw, 22 — have pleaded not guilty to various misdemeanor charges, including false imprisonment, obstructing a public thoroughfare, vandalism, and resisting arrest. Three other men also face charges in a separate case.
Each charge carries a maximum of six months in San Luis Obispo County Jail and a $1,000 fine.
The group is scheduled for a pre-trial conference Tuesday in San Luis Obispo Superior Court.
SLO County District Attorney Dan Dow responds to judge’s ruling
On Friday, Dow addressed the judge’s ruling in a news release that stipulated that his statement “is not authorized to be paraphrased or used in part only.”
Here is Dow’s full statement:
“First, let me be clear I have deep respect for the judicial process and the judges who are called to make difficult decisions.
“With that in mind, I respectfully and strongly disagree with Judge Guerrero‘s findings and decision to recuse the District Attorney from prosecuting criminal activity that occurred during this summer’s protests. The law is clear that in order for a district attorney to be recused there must be an actual conflict of interest and the conflict must be so grave as to render it unlikely that the defendant will receive fair treatment during all portions of the criminal proceedings.
“There is absolutely no conflict in this case. To the contrary. While I have been personally attacked on many occasions since the arrests in these cases, I have continued to conduct my duty in a manner that is above reproach without bending to popular opinion and public pressure. I am proud of the professionalism that our office has maintained under months of immense public pressure. We have thoroughly, fairly, and objectively reviewed volumes of evidence, conducted additional independent investigation, and made every decision based on the facts and the applicable law. We have never wavered from our steadfast commitment to ensure that every defendant receives fair treatment while we perform our important Constitutional duty.
“To recuse an elected district attorney who has been chosen by the voters of San Luis Obispo County to enforce the law in our community without any evidence of an actual conflict undermines the role and independent nature of an elected prosecutor and sets a dangerous precedent.”
This story was originally published December 11, 2020 at 3:00 PM.
