A Gilroy City Councilman who acted as an adviser to former
Councilman Craig Gartman during an interview with the District
Attorney’s Office said investigators told Gartman they would
consider letting him off the hook for allegedly stealing from a
parade fund if he donated to a charity. Full article
Today’s breaking news:
City utility boxes get facelift
Gilroyans pay through a pricey pipe for water
Garlic Festival announces headlining acts
A Gilroy City Councilman who acted as an adviser to former Councilman Craig Gartman during an interview with the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office in July 2010 said investigators told Gartman they would consider letting him off the hook for allegedly stealing more than $9,000 from a private parade fund if he donated to a charity.
It’s a side of the story that contrasts with interview summaries included in the case’s court file, in which Deputy District Attorney Bud Frank reportedly tells Gartman the donation was the ex-Councilman’s idea, and that it wouldn’t dictate whether he would face charges.
Woodward recalled that Frank and Michael Sterner, the lead investigator, suggested Gartman pay the missing sum of more than $9,000 to a charitable organization.
“They were saying to him, in no uncertain terms, ‘Pay this money that you can’t account for to a charity,’ ” said Perry Woodward, current Councilman and an attorney and partner in the San Jose firm Terra Law. “What they were getting at was, ‘Pay this money to a charity and we’ll let you slide.’ ”
He added, “And that was all their idea.”
Woodward accompanied Gartman, who has been accused of stealing the money while serving as co-chair of the Gilroy Memorial Day Parade Committee from 2002-2008. Gartman was charged with grand theft May 27 and self-surrendered to authorities June 2 after a warrant was issued for his arrest.
Woodward called Gartman’s exchange with investigators “one of the weirdest things I’ve ever seen.”
“In my 15 years of practicing law, I have never seen anything as underhanded as this,” he said.
Woodward added he was “just befuddled” by the interview, and remembered being shocked almost to the point of laughter at some instances.
Woodward, who thought investigators were “unfair” to Gartman, was quoted in the interview summaries as saying, “Would it help if Craig was to propose a civil compromise?”
Woodward said that quote was misrepresented, saying it came after investigators pressed Gartman and hinted heavily at the option of donating to a charity.
The interview summary, however, states investigators wouldn’t say whether the donation would mean the difference between charges or not, but it was an idea Gartman “came up with on his own and that is was not prompted by the investigator.”
Gartman will be arraigned at 9 a.m. Tuesday, June 21, though a courtroom still hasn’t been assigned, according to Amy Cornell, spokeswoman for the District Attorney’ s office.
On Thursday, Frank, who was replaced by Deputy District Attorney John Chase as case supervisor in January, said, “I can’t comment on confidential interviews.” Sterner said he wouldn’t be able to comment without approval from the District Attorney’s office administration.
Multiple, daily attempts this week to reach Gartman or his attorney, Kirk Elliott of the San Jose firm Roberts & Elliott LLP, were not successful as of press time.
Woodward and Gartman were serving on the Council at the time of the interview. Woodward said Terra Law donated $2,000 to the parade fund in 2008 – Gartman’s last year as co-chair – and $1,500 in 2009.
A two-year investigation filled with at least 20 interviews and the analyses of thousands of financial documents concluded with the District Attorney’s office charging Gartman, who served on the Council from 2001 through 2010. Gartman ran for mayor in 2007, but lost to Al Pinheiro, whom Gartman later blamed for starting a wave of criticism against him.
According to court records, Gartman couldn’t explain to investigators more than $9,000 worth of checks he wrote to himself and his wife from the parade fund, though Gartman said the money was for reimbursements for parade expenses. Interview summaries report Gartman discussed with investigators ways the money could be returned, and Sterner’s notes state Gartman agreed that paying the money back was his responsibility, according to court files.
The interview was recorded with Gartman and Woodward’s knowledge, though neither recorded a personal copy of the interview.
Most interviews conducted by the District Attorney’s office – including a near-six-hour June 2010 sit-down between Gartman, Sterner and Investigator Nate Wandruff – were not, according to court documents.
The audio recordings of the interviews have not been released, and Deputy District Attorney John Chase said Wednesday they likely wouldn’t be made available to the Dispatch.
“The fact that they won’t give you the tape, that tells you something,” Woodward said.
Chase said the summaries were made available in the court file but not the audio recordings because it was “inefficient for a judge to have to listen to hours of recording.”
Chase said the California Penal Code allowed the District Attorney’s office to record the conversations without consent of Gartman or other subjects in the case.
