happenings that were occurring. and no. there was no specifics provided to me about any conversation between my wife and linnette peralta haynes. >> now sheriff, let's go back to the second page of exhibit 83, and that's the page again that shows on the to -- on the top. your text message to your wife. left you a v.m. but didn't hear back. what happened? sheriff, was that 12:03 text message to ask what happened with your wife and linnette

peralta haynes? >> objection. asked and answered. >> overruled. >> no. i do not believe it is. >> and if we look at the next exhibit after the 12:03 text message asking your wife what happened, we see a 12:24 p.m., 21 minutes later a text message from your wife to ivory madison saying she is not going to call police, she is going to open a record with her doctor. >> i see that, yes. >> ok. >> and it's your -- there's no connection between text message to your wife and -- >> no. >> all right. sheriff let's go back to where we left off on january 4. you told us after your bridge

et committee meeting, you were moving from office to office from your supervisoral office to the sheriff's office. did you go home after that move? >> i quickly went home to grab -- i'm trying to recall what time of the day. but i went home to grab some papers and then just left. >> ok. so when you went home, did you go out to the back steps area of your house? >> i did. the back door was open. >> ok. >> and what did you see on the back steps area of your house? >> my wife engaged in a conversation with the upstairs neighbor. >> and the upstairs neighbor is talenty williams? >> yes. >> at that time what did you understand their conversation fob about?

>> i didn't. i didn't stay long enough to have a conversation. i said hi and by. >> did you ask your wife to come in and talk with you after she was done? >> i didn't ask her to. she did, and it was just simply to talk about the rest of the day as it relates to picking up our son. >> so you didn't ask your wife to come back in when she was done talking to cali williams? >> i did not. i believe my wife decided on her own to just come in as i was leaving because i was quickly departing. >> now, when your wife came back in, how long of a conversation did you have with her? >> maybe two minutes. maybe a minute. >> did you talk at all about what your wife and cali williams were discussing on the back steps? >> no. >> did you talk at all about your wife's earlier conversation that morning with

linnette peralta haynes? >> no. >> you mentioned your conversation involved picking up your son later in the day? >> yes. it was a quick conversation. >> was there anything else discussed? >> probably just me la meanting all the preparation and kind of the normal chaos of transitioning offices and being inaugurated a couple days away. >> and what was your wife's demeanor when you were home briefly? >> warm. >> she didn't seem concerned? >> i think she was concerned about the overall stress because of a great amount of demands that were placed on us in preparing for a big transition. >> ok. sheriff. i just want to know your impression of how your wife

seemed to you. not your view of why she may have seemed concerned. did she seem concerned during that conversation with her? >> concerned about what? could you -- >> did she seem happy or worried? >> as i said, i think she seemed warm. >> so she did not seem concerned in that conversation when you were home preefl on the 4th? >> no. >> and did your wife inform you of what her plans were for the rest of the day during that conversation? >> no. >> did you inform her what your plans were for the rest of the day after that conversation? >> well, as i said, to return to get papers to go back to city hall. >> ok. anything else? did you say anything else to your wife about your plans for that afternoon during your

conversation? >> i may have reminded her about an event that was being flown my honor later that afternoon as i was exiting, there was an event planned for me as the former chair of -- >> that was the event that was scheduled to occur at 5:30 in the afternoon? >> yes. >> where did you go after you left? now do you have an approximate guess of when you left your home that day? >> i don't. i'm sorry. but it was very short. i was there only a couple minutes. >> and when you left home, where did you go? >> city hall. >> how did you get to city hall? >> i believe i drove. i was darting back and forth. but i often walk from my home to city hall, too. >> do you recall one way or the other? >> i believe i drove. >> and when you got to city

hall on the afternoon of the 4th, approximately what time was it? >> maybe 2:00-something -- maybe later. >> where did you go when you got city hall that afternoon? >> i would go to my second floor office then fourth floor between sheriff and sprfer's office. >> and what were you doing? >> as i shared earlier, we were transitioning out of offices. i was required to vacate my office by friday. january 6. so there was a lot of demand for us to be out of our office by friday, january 6. so we could make preparation for transition. so there was a lot of responsibility --

responsibilities. >> so what were you actually doing as part of this effort to vacate the supervisor's office that afternoon? >> well, having to negotiate furniture, files, papers, where things were being sent from my office downstairs to the offices up here where they weren't entirely ready, because they were painting the offices up here and making room and accommodations. so like any time when somebody moves, it's a little distressful. >> so were you directing those efforts to move that afternoon? >> i wouldn't say i was directing, but i was certainly monitoring. >> what else were you doing that afternoon? >> taking care of business, with regard to cleaning up as a supervisor. and in preparation for coming into the office of sheriff.

>> did you have any scheduled meetings that afternoon? >> impromptu. people game which is quite routine as a public serveibility and a lot 06 people were coming in and stopping me along the way, congratulating me and thanking me, and just sharing their well wishes. >> who are some of those people that you saw on the afternoon of january 4 in city hall? >> people around. supervisors. fellow supervisors and other staff and constituents. >> can you provide any names? >> i'll have to think about it. people come in supervisor's offices all the time. that's quite a normal existence. >> i'm asking you to give us names of people you visited with. >> clerk staff. like ms. angela, clerk of the

board. relating to my own staff, and others, yes. >> ok. you mentioned one name. angela. you spoke with her on the afternoon of january 4 while you were attending to your -- >> yes, sir. i believe i did and other members of the board. >> can you give us all the names of the people you spoke with during that time period? >> objection. asked and answered. >> no, where i can't. >> i want to say a couple things. mr. wagner, we have a microphone here. i think it would be helpful if you used it to make objections so everybody can hear. is that possible? would you mind moving over there? the second thing is we're now in a very sensitive part of the hearing where we have testimony coming from witnesses, and so we're going to have to be very

strict about comments and outbursts from the crowd. i understand you may have -- you may feel like you want to have a reaction, and that's natural. but i would ask you to restrain yourself, because it is important that the we have silence and can focus on the witness and question. if there is an outburst, i am asking that they be removed from the proceedings. thank you. >> sheriff, where were you when you first learned there was a police investigation of the incident on january -- excuse me, where were you when you first learned there was a police investigation of the incident between you and your wife that occurred on december 31? >> i received a phone call from my wife some time after 4:00 p.m. on january 4. and she alluded that there was

some happening involving the police. and the neighbor, and she wanted to come talk with me, so it was after 4:00 p.m. on january 4 that i first learned of any of this. >> where were you? >> city hall. >> where in city hall? >> i believe my second floor office. >> your old office is this >> yes. but it was my supervisor's office still. >> who was with you when you learned about that? >> well, i'm sure the my staff was present. but it wasn't a conference call. so nobody specifically was with me. i received a direct phone call. >> had you received text messages from your wife prior to actually speaking with her on the phone about the police

investigation? >> no. i don't believe so. no. >> had you received text messages from linnette peralta haynes that afternoon before speaking with your wife about that investigation? >> only in a very vague way. i believe if i recall correctly the text messages said, call me. it's an emergency. call me. that's all i had seen. >> so sheriff, i want to go back to exhibit 83. we're on page two of exhibit 83.

now, sheriff if we go down to 3:47 p.m., we see a text message from ms. peralta haynes to you that says can you call me, it is you are intelligent regarding illiana. did you see that text message before or after speaking with your wife that afternoon? >> after. >> ok. >> how do you know you saw that after speaking with your wife that afternoon? >> because i was putting this all together when my wife informed me after 4:00, and it all became more clear what was happening.

and that was within the next, if i'm not mistaken 20-25 minutes from when my wife had called me. >> now sheriff i want to be clear in my question about this. what i just understood you to say was at least you understood the import of this text message after you spoke with your wife. but i want to make sure i understand whether you saw this text message before you spoke with your wife. >> no. i don't believe i did. >> ok. and then we have another text message immediately below that at 3:53 p.m. from ms. peralta haynes to you. stating i need to talk to you to protect you. call me. do you see that text message? >> i do. >> did you see that text message before you learned about this investigation from your wife and phone call?

>> no. or else if i had seen the earlier one, i would have responded. >> when you say you would have responded, you mean you would have put in a call? >> i would have reapplied in some fashion, i guess. >> ok. so upon seeing this type of message, you're natural response would have been to reply to it whether by text message or telephone? >> yes. generally. >> now sheriff, earlier we discussed whether you had ever referred to linnette peralta haynes as a domestic violence advocate. you said you had never personally described ms. peralta haynes that way. >> i don't believe so i had. i believe i knew that was in her background, but that was not her relationship with me.

>> ok. now this text message from ms. peralta haynes at 3:53 p.m. says, i need to talk to you to protect you. call me. >> do domestic violence advocates usually protect the frarptse or victims of the violence? >> objection. >> objection sustained. there's no foundation. >> so sheriff you are aware of the portrayal of ms. linnette

peralta haynes as a domestic violence advocate. >> i have heard of the references. >> but to you she's a political consultant. >> i think you've established that fact. >> now sheriff, if we look further in exhibit 3, -- in exhibit 83. if you look on page three.

we see a text message from your wife to you at 4:18 p.m. in the afternoon. stating call me, it is an emergency. do you see that? >> i do. >> do you recall receiving that text message from your wife? >> yes. >> and when did you -- what did you do in response to that text message from your wife? >> i believe we spoke. not long after that. >> actually, if we look down on exhibit 83, at 4:23 p.m., we

see a call from you to your wife. >> yes. five minutes later. >> right. so was that -- would that call be in response to her text message? >> i believe my wife was following up, correct. from her text message. >> well, the call shows it's from you to your wife not from your wife to you, do you see that? >> it says zero seconds, though. >> there are three calls at that time. so if you could. >> oh, right. ok. >> sheriff, it shows so there's three calls shown at 4:23 p.m. >> yes. apparently i was trying to return my wife's call, unable to get through. so i had made several attempts. >> right. and then she ends up calling you, and that's where we see a

-- >> at 4:23 p.m. i had called her twice. at 4:23. did not connect with her. because it says zero seconds and 17 seconds. then i supposed within that minute she called me back. >> ok. so you attempted to call your wife, and then she basically called you whether it's lines crossed or any other explanation, but immediately after you tried to call her? >> yes. >> ok. so when you called your wife, had you just read the text message from her is this -- from her? >> when i made the phone call, yes. >> and at that time had you also seen the text messages that had come in from ms. haynes earlier? >> quite possibly when i was able to review my phone, yes. i saw that i had text messages and i guess i needed to respond. >> ok. >> and what did your wife tell

you in that 4:23 phone call? >> that she told me that the neighbors next door, ms. madison was pursuing a complaint with the police. she had made mention of a video, which i just learned about for the first time. and she was very concerned. very, very concerned. and wanted to come and meet me and talk with me. and that was pretty much the extent of the conversation. >> and were you in your supervisor's office when you had that call with your wife? >> i believe i was either on the second floor or fourth

floor, because i was going back and forth. >> was there anyone around while you were speaking with your wife for that 5:00 minute telephone call? >> there were numerous people around, because the moving -- >> do you recall anyone in specific? >> my staff. >> was there anyone else in the room? >> well, our doors are never closed. so people come in and out. staff like brown and sell may are two of my principal staff people and rick gal brith. but as i said, i was going back and forth between the second and fourth floor, and on the fourth floor would have been sheriff secretary susan and undersecretary who may have left already that the time. >> sheriff, you've give analyst of several people who may have been around. do you have a specific recollection of any specific person who was around? >> could you be more clear when

you say around? >> ok. next to you when you made that call with your wife. >> next to me -- no. i do not. no. >> ok. >> but i do believe there were you know what i mean and out of our office quite a bit, because they were working. >> were there people within earshot when you made that call at 4:23? >> i'm sure there were. >> can you identify any of those people who were in earshot? >> i cannot. >> now sheriff, you sat down with the bay guardian in april for a story about the events that had occurred on december 31 and the ensuing police investigation? >> yes. >> which reporter did you sit down with? >> objection.

irrelevant. it's about the subject matter. >> there were three people present. tim red mand, steve jones and actually there was a woman present, but i didn't know her. >> who else was present? >> oh, um, -- a man named jeff guillen kirk. david wagner and katy clice they are in i think is her last name. >> and how long was that meeting that you had with the bay guardian reporters? >> it was about a little over an hour. >> ok. so sheriff i want to read you a

short passage from that story, and you can tell me whether it's accurate or not. >> please. >> ok. now this is referring to what happened after you found out about the police investigation from your wife. and a series of contexts. >> objection. >> sustained. >> sheriff, i'll simply read this passage and you can tell me whether it's true or not. >> objection. lack of foundation. >> sustained, council, you haven't established what it is. there's no foundation. >> can we establish -- can you establish what the document is? we haven't seen it. witness hasn't seen it. i mean, we have no idea what you're reading from. >> i'm not offering this into evidence. i just want the witness' telling me whether this is true

or not. i'm not offering the document. >> that's fine but i think it's more fair for you to show it to the witness and frankly i'd like see it, too, if you're going to be reading it. >> i do have a copy for the witness. >> ok. >> do you have a copy for counsel as well? >> no. but i'm happy to show it to counsel. >> sheriff. i'm going to make a box around what i'm going to read, so that

you can follow it. so sheriff again, i wanted to read this to you and you can tell me whether it's accurate. they made a couple calls to find an attorney. and he said lopezed that idea of having their friend, linnette peralta haynes, a domestic violence advocate with the our family coalition reach out to madison about why she had gone to police and what could be done that the point. i had no idea what they were going to talkability, mirkarimi claims. >> what's the question? >> the question is, is that an accurate account of what occurred in the conversation between you and your wife after

you learned about this incident ? about the police investigation. >> which senator >> well, let's take it step-by-step. >> ok. >> i'm sorry. i'm sorry to interrupt you. do you have a copy you can put on the -- >> i do not. i'm sorry. i just have to copy for the witness. >> that's fine. sorry to interrupt you. go ahead. >> ok. so sheriff after you got this call from your wife, did you make a plan about what to do next, about meeting your wife? >> my wife asked if we can meet, and i said, yes. so to the extent of a plan, yes. >> and did you meet with your wife shortly after this call? >> i think it was within the next 20-25 minutes, she had walked to city hall, and i met her outside. >> ok.