Balcony case will return to court

DA, contractor at odds over evidence preservation

OAKLAND — The general contractor who filed for a restraining order against Alameda County prosecutors said that negotiations to allow Segue Construction to observe tests on evidence in the fatal Berkeley balcony collapse have ended with no resolution, and both sides will be back in court Thursday.

“Segue was informed (Wednesday) that the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, contrary to previous statements, is no longer willing to work with Segue and its representatives to find a meaningful resolution to the evidence preservation issues at hand,” the company said in an email statement. “We are disappointed by the sudden change in the District Attorney’s position but will continue to cooperate with all aspects of the investigation.”

The statement came hours after a scheduled hearing on the temporary restraining order had been postponed for the second time so both parties could continue to “talk among themselves,” a court clerk said. Alameda County District Attorney’s Office spokeswoman Teresa Drenick declined to comment on specifics about the negotiations.

“This matter is scheduled to be heard in a court of law (Thursday),” she said. “We do not litigate our matters in the press.”

Segue filed for the restraining order to try and preserve evidence taken from the apartment building, including a second lower deck that did not fail but showed the same type of water damage as the fifth story balcony that collapsed June 16, sending six people to their deaths and injuring seven others. Investigators say the collapsed balcony had severe dry rot.

The Pleasanton-based company has argued in court documents it was concerned that critical evidence for expected civil litigation could be destroyed.

“We will appear before the Court (Thursday) to obtain a substantive ruling on our temporary restraining order,” the company said. “We believe that Segue and any potential party, known or unknown at this time, should be afforded the opportunity to view and document the evidence prior to any destructive testing or potential alterations by the District Attorney.”

Legal experts have said a target of a criminal investigation seeking a restraining order against investigators pursuing the case is odd, and would be a difficult legal maneuver to win.