John Chiv: "Jane Doe said she was frozen, scared and watching TV and trying to ignore it."

Nov 6, 2022

"Jane Doe said she was frozen, scared and watching TV and trying to ignore it."

On November 2, there was a preliminary hearing for alleged molester Christian Bautista-Ramirez. It was a lengthy preliminary hearing.

Judge Timothy Canning held Bautista-Ramirez to answer to all four charges in the complaint as well as granted the request by the People for a 5th count which will be added to the arraignment on information scheduled for 11/16.

The alleged victim Jane Doe. She is Bautista-Ramirez's cousin. She is 18 years old now but based on testimony at the preliminary hearing, the alleged incidents occurred when she was 10 years old.

Based on information shared at the preliminary hearing including her biological father's name, she does not share the last name as Bautista-Ramirez. His mother and her Bautista-Ramirez's mothers are sisters.

The first alleged incident happened at a family gathering after a grandmother's funeral. Jane Doe had a panic attack at Rita's restaurant in Arcata which led to disclosure to other family members about the alleged sexual molestation.

The People's only witness was Eureka Police Department School Resource Officer Tim Marsolan. At the time of the investigation, Marsolan was in the EPD Detective Bureau. He resigned from that department to take on this current position. HCSO originally investigated the allegation which was taken over by EPD.

Deputy District Attorney Whitney Timm is the prosecutor. Ms. Andrea Sullivan is Bautista-Ramirez's attorney. Defense presented one witness who testified briefly; private investigator Desirae Hadley. She previously worked for the Humboldt County Public Defender's Office.

If this case proceeds to trial, testimony and the details provided will be very crucial.

There were five family members who came to court with Bautista-Ramirez. He posted bail and is out of custody.

On September 1, 2021 EPD took over the investigation from HCSO Sgt. Krystle Arminio about an alleged sexual assault. Det. Marsolan got the CAST interview recording from DA Investigator Ryan Hill.

Ms. Sullivan's objection about Officer Marsolan testifying about the CAST interview was overruled by Judge Canning after argument by Ms. Timm. Judge Canning said "it can be raised as a 995 motion."

The CAST interview took place on August 11, 2021.Kim Schneider interviewed Jane Doe who was a minor at that time. Officer Marsolan said the "child in the CAST interview is the same child I met when I met the victim's families."

Det. Marsolan met Jane Doe "a couple of days after September 1." She was 16 years old and said her "summer was not going well. She was going through anxiety and stress. " Jane Doe mentioned sexual assault and said it was her cousin, Christian Bautista-Ramirez."

Jane Doe said the first incident happened the same day as the funeral for her grandmother. "Jane Doe was at her residence. She was in the TV room with Christian. She recalled Christian put his head under her skirt. looking at her crotch area. She recalled Christian putting her hand on his crotch area moving it up and down. She described Christian pulling her pants aside and licking her crotch area. After this incident Christian told Jane Doe to wash her hands."

Jane Doe's residence is in Myrtletown in the unincoporated area of Humboldt.

The second incident was at Bautista-Ramirez's house with Jane Doe's family visiting his family. "Christian placed his hand on her crotch area and moved it up and down." Her hand was under his pants. "Jane Doe said her hands were wet, sticky and sweaty." Jane Doe was recounting memories and said she was "8 or 9 or 10" at the time of the alleged molestation.

Ms. Timm went back to the first incident and asked Det. Marsolan how Jane Doe described feeling when the first incident occurred. "Jane Doe said she was frozen, scared and watching TV and trying to ignore it."

Jane Doe said "down there"; "that area" and used the word "high" in the CAST interview. Det. Marsolan later clarified that she meant penis and that high was "Christian ejaculating."

The third incident also took place at Bautista-Ramirez's house. Once again, they were watching TV. "Christian kissed her neck and touched her boob area and chest." This was "under her shirt and touching skin." This like the second incident was at another family visit. Jane Doe said "all her brothers, her aunt (Christian's mom) and her mom were at the house but not in the living room."

There was a second CAST interview on November 2021 after Jane Doe made a disclosure about more information.

At the second CAST interview, Jane Doe had to stay overnight at Bautista-Ramirez's house while her family drove to the Bay Area for a football game. She was getting dressed for a birthday party in her grandmother's room. "Christian came into the room, placed his hands underneath her skirt, rubbing her vagina area and was kissing her neck."

Jane Doe was visiting her sister in Chicago when she recalled this incident. "After a restless night, she told her sister." She recalled being 10 years old at the time of this incident.

Det. Marsolan spoke with Jane Doe's father, M.B. (his last name is not Bautista) who remembered the Raiders game and the date being September 4, 2021. Jane Doe's family showed law enforcement Instagram photos of Bautista-Ramirez. The first incident occurred when Bautista-Ramirez was 18. Jane Doe said "Christian never talked about it with her."

HCSO Sgt. Arminio did the "initial" identification of Bautista-Ramirez. Det. Marsolan contacted him.

Ms. Sullivan started her cross of Det. Marsolan stating that the grandmother's funeral was on August 23, 2014. She told Det. Marsolan "both of Mr. Bautista-Ramirez's grandparents are alive."

"Could it have been Jane Doe's grandmother or great grandmother's funeral?" Ms. Sullivan asked Det. Marsolan.

"I don't know," he responded.

Ms. Sullivan: "Did the CAST interviewer ask Jane Doe if she knew what sexual touching was at the ages of 8 and 10? Did Jane Doe tell anyone as a child"

Det. Marsolan: "No. That wasn't disclosed in the CAST interview." He said he did not determine in response to the second question.

Ms. Sullivan: "The first time Jane Doe told someone was at Rita's restaurant."

Det. Marsolan: "Yes."

Ms. Sullivan: "Jane Doe never said Mr. Bautista-Ramirez threatened her.:

Det. Marsolan responded that Jane Doe did not mention any threats.

Det. Marsolan said he determined at the time of the first incident, "Jane Doe was 9, going on 10."

Det. Marsolan said he did not verify if Bautista-Ramirez attended the funeral.

During redirect,Ms. Timm asked about the third incident. There was no date but Jane Doe described family "picking fruit from trees" which led Det. Marsolan "to believe this incident happened in the Fall; in September or October."

Det. Marsolan said the first incident happened in August 2014 and all other incidents happened after the initial incident.

During re-cross, Ms. Sullivan asked Det. Marsolan who told him that the funeral was in August 2014?

Det. Marsolan responded that it was Jane Doe's father and M.B. was the one who said that it was Jane Doe's grandmother. Det Marsolan said "so it would be M.B's mother or mother-in-law."

Hadley came in while Det. Marsolan was testifying. Ms. Sullivan had made a motion to exclude all witnesses. Hadley stayed when she shouldn't have. Her testimony was introduced by Ms. Sullivan as Hadley using special software available only to P.I.s to do internet research. That turned out to mean Hadley looked up M.B. on Facebook and did an online search for an obit for one specific name of a grandmother. This was Hadley's first day on the case and she spoke to one of Bautista-Ramirez's family members during break. She had no idea who wrote the obituary. It was on Legacy.com. Hadley's search was sloppy and incomplete.

I have looked up people on Facebook and done online searches that were more detailed and cross referenced to make sure I have the right person. That isn't some special P.I. software. I know most attorneys make motions to exclude witnesses. Hadley sitting in court listening to Det. Marsolan's testimony was a blatant disregard of a basic court rule she chose to ignore.

Hadley also had an attitude which was unprofessional. I took notes but am not posting her brief testimony which was already a waste of time and did not impeach anyone as defense intended.

Hadley's late mom worked for the Public Defender. Hadley knows several Public Defender's and some Humboldt criminal private defense attorneys. Parlaying some Humboldt connections that into some gigs does not make one a competent private investigator. Hadley is another example of Humboldt nepotism giving the unqualified a cushy goverment job while using the same small town circle to start a non profit to mooch more funds to make a living.

Ms. Sullivan is a good criminal defense attorney but she needs to chose a more competent and professional P.I. In more than one case, a better P.I. could have been helpful to Ms. Sullivan. Just because Hadley checked out one specific grandmother does not prove anything.

During oral argument, Ms. Timm told Judge Canning that Count 1 pertains to the funeral. Count 2 is the incident when the family went to the Raider's game. Count 3 is the incident with the hands down the pants. Count 4 is when the family was picking fruit. The 5th count refers to the third incident described.

Charges for preliminary hearing: