He made threats — then made bail
Release of manwho allegedly posted intention to kill Jews has shaken local Jewish community
Two days after Ross Farca allegedly posted on the video game platform “Steam” that he wanted to imitate the Poway synagogue shooter “except with a Nazi uniform on” and tally “a body count of at least 30,” Concord police arrested him at his home.
They booked himinto the Martinez Detention Facility and charged him with making criminal threats, as well as manufacturing and possessing an illegal assault weapon. When police searched the 23-year- old’s home in Concord, they found an assault rifle Farca claimed to have made, 13 empty magazines, a 3-foot katana sword, camouflage clothes, pistol ammunition, a hunting knife and books about Hitler youth and Nazis.
But the day after his arrest in June, Farca was released upon posting a $12,500 deposit for his $125,000 bail. He remains out of custody until his preliminary hearing nextmonth under the single condition that he can be searched by police at any time.
His release has shaken the local Jewish community, whose members have been reel
ing since the Poway synagogue attack in San Diego in April.
In the wake of more mass shootings very recently — in Gilroy, El Paso and Dayton — Farca’s case now raises a question close to the heart of the national debate: Is our system capable of preventing such massacres?
Legally, there are limits on what law enforcement and prosecutors can do to keep a person such as Farca — charged with threatening but not yet acting on plans to commit a massacre — in custody.
At a June 13 hearing, Contra Costa Superior Court Judge David Goldstein lowered Farca’s bail amount from $225,000 to $125,000 due to a technical requirement that prosecutors didn’t challenge because, they said later, it was well within the law.
Asked by this news organization whether he considered refusing to set any bail, Goldstein forwarded the emailed question to Presiding Judge Barry Baskin, who replied: “Judges are ethically precluded from commenting on specific cases while they are pending, as is the case here.”
Scott Alonso, a spokesman for the district attorney’s office, declined to say why prosecutors didn’t press the judge to keep Farca locked up, saying he can’t comment on evidence in the case. He pointed out that prosecutors “vigorously” opposed the defense’s request to release Farca on his own recognizance.
Under Article 1 of the California Constitution, people have the right to bail except in felony cases “when the facts are evident or the presumption great and the court finds based on clear and convincing evidence that the person has threatened another with great bodily harm and that there is a substantial likelihood that the person would carry out the threat if released.”
California’s penal code states that in setting or denying bail, a judge shall consider “protection of the public, the seriousness of the offense charged, the previous criminal record of the defendant, and the probability of his or her appearing at trial or at a hearing of the case. The public safety shall be the primary consideration.”
At first blush, Farca’s case seems like the kind of break law enforcement too seldom gets: An armed young white man — one who uses social media to spew racial hatred and express an intention to kill — is apprehended before he can do harm. But in mere days, he was free.
“These types of threats are usually antecedents to real violence. Many mass shooters that we have seen make similar threats, write manifestos or otherwise communicate their intentions online before they shoot,” said Christian Jaworski, who studies mass shootings at University of New Hampshire.
“It is a miracle that this was caught before any violence occurred,” said Jaworski, who questions Farca’s release. “Usually, it is only in the aftermath of a mass shooting when people comb through the social media presence of alleged perpetrators and discover the violent clues.”
But Farca’s recently obtained attorney, Joseph Tully, said in an interview this week his client is no potential mass slayer. Instead, Tully said he suffers from a developmental disorder and lacks even the ability to understand why people took his remarks seriously.
Since the release, the detective who investigated him obtained a temporary court order restricting Farca from obtaining any more weapons. But Farca is contesting that order, and a hearing on the issue has been scheduled for October.
Crime experts suggest the court’s bail system needs to be reexamined in the wake of today’s mass slaying climate.
“It seems like he still poses a threat to the general public,” said Dinur Blum, a lecturer at Cal State Los Angeles, who studies mass shootings. “Bail is supposed to be offered if a person isn’t supposed to be a future threat — it’s just a guarantee that they show up for trial,” Blum added.
In his postings on Steam, Farca allegedly discussed picking a “better target than some random synagogue” and referred to Jews as “subhumans.” That was reported by Steam and at least one user to police, according to authorities. He also reportedly wrote about being inspired by the Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand in March and the Poway synagogue shooting; he referred to the Christchurch shooter as a “hero,” authorities said.
Jaworski said Farca’s release, in his experience, is highly unusual.
“There is not any example that I can think of where a person threatened violence and then was released,” he said.
“Was Farca just kidding around and making tasteless jokes? The problem is that many mass shooters also make similar threats in similar language,” Jaworski said.
Tully described Farca as a “very autistic” young man who thought the remarks would be taken as a joke.
“The anti-Semitic stuff, it was all trolling. Earlier, he was claiming to be a communist and posting ‘ workers of the world unite,’ and before that he was posting that he was a transsexual. He was trolling everybody,” Tully said. “( Farca) made an inappropriate comment and he owned a gun, but he didn’t have any plans to hurt anyone. It was a statement made in very poor taste and a normal person would know that was the case, but he doesn’t have the same social skills.”
“The only time we can guarantee someone isn’t going to commit an offense is if they’re in custody,” he said. “We hope that our actions are enough to intervene in any planned violence.”