It is clear that there is no legitimate reason for you to intentionally insert yourself into this process and that your sole reason for doing so is to intentionally interfere with Ri-Nu’s ability to secure a CUP Permit for the Facility and its efforts to re-open and operate the same. You should be aware that in doing so, you are also injuring (intentionally or otherwise) those individuals who claimed to have been injured as a result of the incident and its aftermath – the very people the District Attorney’s office sought to protect – as their right to restitution is expressly contingent upon Ri-Nu securing the necessary permits to re-open and operate the Facility. Have you checked with the District Attorney’s office regarding your intended course of action and the information you intend to publicly disclose; all of which you obtained in the course of your work for that office and which you undoubtedly were prohibited from taking with you after your employment was terminated? Have you spoken to them about the fact that your actions will harm the very people that office has sought to protect? Or that you continue to hold yourself out as an investigator for the District Attorney’s office on your LinkedIn page?
You need to be extremely careful with regard to what you do, say and disclose during your proposed “presentation.” Although you had certain protections while acting on behalf of the District Attorney’s office in your official capacity, as a private citizen, those protections are gone, and like everyone else, you are subject to civil liability, including punitive damages, if you make or republish any false or defamatory statements (including the republication of any false testimony given during the grand jury proceedings) about our clients, the Facility (which they have an interest in through SCWW and as senior secured creditors), Ri-Nu, or any other person or entity, including the individuals who were defendants in the action brought by the District Attorney’s office. If we learn that you made any false or defamatory statements during your “presentation,” you are hereby advised that our clients and those harmed by your actions will take all actions necessary and appropriate to protect their interests to the maximum extent permissible under the law. Govern yourself accordingly.
Cc: Leonard B. Rose, Esq.
Sincerely, Greer S. Lang
Barry is a retired District Attorney Investigator in the DA’s Major Fraud Division and led the criminal investigation into the November 18, 2014, Santa Clara Wastewater explosion in Santa Paula. He retired in 2018 after an 18-year career conducting investigations into fraud, financial crimes, human trafficking, and money laundering. Barry has a Doctorate in Management, MBA in Management and Organizational Leadership, and a Bachelor's Degree in Criminal Justice. He is a former instructor for the California District Attorneys Association and is currently the Director of Investigations for Alight Solutions, a publicly traded global benefits company.
People in Santa Paula still remember explosion at the wastewater treatment plant that injured 50 people, most due to exposure to toxic chemicals. Among the most seriously injured were three Santa Paula firefighters, two forced to retire because of respiratory damage. The incident began after the rear of a vacuum truck hissed and exploded with a blue flame at the plant about 3:45 a.m., causing a 1,000-gallon chemical spill and fire, sending shrapnel and the contents flying hundreds of feet. The incident included the later ignition of a toxic cloud that had formed over the plant that led to a declaration of an emergency by the county that lasted 60 days, mass evacuations and closure of the immediate area for days.
Firefighters had to stand by helplessly as the fire spread to totes containing unknown chemicals that exploded and burned. During the height of the incident, first responders were told again and again by SCWW employees that the company processed only sewage. So volatile was the unknown mixture of chemicals that when it dried it caused firefighters’ boots to ignite and, when personnel tried to move it, the tires on the SPFD engine to go up in flames.
A Grand Jury was convened for a three-week hearing to see if there was sufficient evidence to indict the employees for criminal offenses, which relied heavily on Barry’s investigation and subsequent evidence. Charges resulted from allegations addressed in more than 300 pages of search warrant affidavits that showed a pattern of criminal behavior by SWW and Green Compass Environmental Solutions, its business affiliate and nine company officials.
Barry concluded in the search warrant affidavits that the plant was unsafely managed, employees were poorly trained and lacked even basic safety equipment and records were routinely falsified before the November 18 explosions and fires occurred.
For more information on the November 18, 2004 SCWW explosion, enter SCWW in this newspaper’s search bar.
