And here's another: Nifonging John Monti? in which it states 1) He was found 'not guilty', 2) The police report taken that day might have been the end of the matter had not Monti filed a grand jury complaint against the San Diego Police Department for failing to investigate human trafficking and child prostitution in McGonigle Canyon. That complaint was filed March 1. Four weeks later (and four months after the original incident) Aguirre's office put out a press bulletin announcing in bold letters that charges were being filed “Against a member of the Minutemen Project."
So, we have a 'he said-they said issue between a photographer and illegals, the photographer is found not guilty at a trial proceeding from charges made only after the photographer filed a complaint against the SDPD.
And you want to defend the illegal plaintiff in this new trial? And then say I should be embarrassed? Yeah, right.
Monti was not, in fact, a member of the Minutemen, though he was affiliated with the anti-illegal group, Save Our State. Still, by erroneously highlighting the Minutemen, Aguirre's office bolstered the suspicion that impartial legal judgment wasn't what informed its prosecutorial decision. What later become clear was that the case against Monti was actively promoted by Claudia Smith, an open border activist and executive director of California Rural Legal Assistance in Oceanside.
And this...
Having been declared "not guilty" by a jury, Monti now faces a civil suit brought by the same CRLA lawyer who appeared with Claudia Smith when she announced on Fox News what Aguirre was going to do, prosecution-wise - two weeks later.
And we now know from the most current article that's the subject of this thread, that that civil suit was dismissed against Monti, and Fox News.