Man beaten in jail argues for right to sue
The 2020 melee involved 31 people and lasted nearly six minutes with no guard intervention
SAN JOSE >> A man who was savagely beaten for several minutes by more than 30 other inmates in the Elmwood men’s jail, with no intervention from correctional deputies, is fighting for his right to sue the county, asking a court to spare him from a filing deadline for civil claims he says he missed because he is incarcerated.
The Nov. 30, 2020, beating has been at the center of a clash between the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office — which operates the county jails — and prosecutors over who was responsible for what happened to Francisco Frias, who was hospitalized for two weeks after the attack by fellow gang members who authorities say suspected Frias had informed on them.
It was one of several incidents cited in a Board of Supervisors referral in August that requested external investigations into high-profile and expensive neglect cases in the county jails and led to an unanimous noconfidence vote in Smith by the board. One of the resulting probes, by the county’s civil grand jury, led to a formal corruption accusation against Smith earlier this month, which if affirmed by a trial jury could force her removal from office.
On Dec. 21, Frias’ attorney filed a petition with the county Superior Court seeking relief from a requirement that he file a liability claim with the county within six months of the underlying incident. Such a claim is a procedural step that typically precedes the filing of a lawsuit.
“Given that Mr. Frias was in custody and there was very limited contact between attorneys and people in custody because of COVID, and because he had never been in this situation before, there is excusable neglect as to why he didn’t file within six months,” the attorney, Jaime Leaños said.
In his petition, he cited language in Government Code 911.6 that a claim that misses the six-month deadline can still be filed within a year of the incident if the “failure to present the claim was through mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.” A similar petition filed with the county was rejected, Leaños said.
A Santa Clara County spokesperson declined to comment on the new petition, citing the county’s practice of not commenting on pending litigation. The sheriff’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
The attack on Frias was not publicly acknowledged by the sheriff’s office until charges were filed this past May against 31 people identified in connection to the beating, largely through the surveillance footage.
Smith who has rejected calls to step down or resign, has directed blame for the beating — which went on without interruption for 5 minutes, 37 seconds despite being in line of sight of a guard station — on prosecutors and defense attorneys, claiming that they did not tell jail staff that Frias required special custody as a witness in a gang murder case.
“We will work with both offices to determine why no information was provided in this incident,” her office said in a statement.
District Attorney Jeff Rosen broke his public silence on Smith’s claim in a response to this news organization, calling her characterization false.
“The responsibility to keep inmates safe from assault when in the custody of the Department of Correction is entrusted to the sheriff, not the district attorney. When the district attorney has an obligation to notify the Department of Correction of a matter involving inmates that may expose one or more inmates to danger, the district attorney acts promptly, ” Rosen said in a statement. “There was no such obligation in the Frias matter and attempts to suggest otherwise are another example of the sheriff blaming others for her failures.”
Frias was hounded just minutes after he was booked at the Elmwood men’s jail in Milpitas, according to authorities. The sheriff’s office has said that someone being held in the same dorm had learned of Frias cooperation with law enforcement through discovery materials in his own criminal case.
The beating was captured on surveillance video, and showed several men hustling the victim to a corner and beating him, tearing away his clothes and dragging him across the dorm. One of the men was seen pouring floor cleaner onto Frias’ open cuts, and there was no apparent attempt to conceal the assault that ended with Frias lying naked on the floor suffering from head lacerations and broken ribs.
“The attack occurred in an open area and in line of sight of the control station. The attack was also recorded by jail security cameras but because guards were using their cell phones, texting and watching videos, they failed to monitor the dorm or prevent the attack,” Frias’ petition reads. “The only reason the attack stopped was because the attackers grew tired and had no energy left to continue their vicious beating of the petitioner.”
It’s why Leaños contends that a filing technicality shouldn’t prevent Frias’ from seeking accountability and damages for what happened to him.
“Whenever anyone’s in custody, the county or jail officials have a duty to make sure that they are safe, that they are cared for and they are protected from injury or from other inmates who may harm them,” he said. “That’s their duty.”