Victims say they are devastated after the San Francisco Superior Court shockingly dismissed more than 70 cases against accused domestic abusers, sex offenders and drunk drivers.
The crisis was sparked this week by a July ruling in which a suspect successfully argued that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated by delays caused by COVID-19, which was subsequently applied to other pending cases.
The high court blamed the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office for the delays, saying it was not its “responsibility to manage the court’s workload.”
For Melissa Bonilla, an alleged victim of domestic abuse, the decision marks the end of a two-year ordeal in search of justice that left her in “shock” before her case went to trial.
“I’m very frustrated because I’ve been waiting for this for two years and one day I don’t get it. Now I’m in shock,” she said. ABC7 News.
Melissa Bonilla, an alleged victim of domestic violence, said she was “shocked” that her case was one of 74 that were dismissed before going to trial because of the backlog of COVID-19 cases.
Bonilla’s case was one of 74 that were dismissed this week on technicalities, leaving several alleged victims and their supporters heartbroken.
Anastacio White, who was at the Superior Court to support a victim, told ABC7 she was shocked by the move and felt it was “not right” for criminals to walk free.
“It could be a bank robber, a rapist, a child molester, it doesn’t matter what it is, you’re fired,” he said.
Each of the 74 defendants was charged between early 2022 and April 2024 with charges including drink driving, sexual assault and deadly driving, and benefited from a massive backlog of cases in the High Court during the pandemic.
The San Francisco public defender’s office said it had raised the issue several times but defended its decision to dismiss the cases this week, blaming poor court management.
“Our clients have a constitutional right, just like the victims,” said public defender Jacque Wilson.
Critics pointed to mismanagement specifically at the San Francisco Superior Court (pictured), saying that “unlike other counties,” it has failed to eliminate its COVID-19 caseload.
“And it was our clients’ rights that were violated again and again.
‘There were half a dozen victims who spoke out, and as public defenders, we obviously don’t leave our humanity at the door for those who felt victimized.
San Francisco Public Defender Jacque Wilson said he felt “sorry” for the victims but insisted that “my job is to protect the rights” of the accused.
“I felt bad for them. At the end of the day, it’s the courts and the prosecution that are supposed to protect their rights. After all, it’s my job to protect the rights of our clients.”
The San Francisco District Attorney’s Office issued a scathing statement after the decision, criticizing the high court for failing to complete its caseload.
“Today’s Superior Court order, unlike courts in other counties in the post-COVID era that have worked through backlogs of cases, has unfortunately robbed victims of justice and robbed defendants of their rights,” the statement read.
“It is not the responsibility of the Prosecutor’s Office to manage the Court’s workload.”
But the prosecutor’s office was the one that Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massulo blamed when she issued the decision to dismiss all 74 cases this week, citing the original July ruling.
She said at the time: “We hope that the prosecution will prioritise the cases appropriately so that justice can be done.”
While the district attorney’s office denies any blame for the situation, it comes after a turbulent few years for the department that saw former District Attorney Chesa Boudin ousted from office after murders rose 11 percent and the city was plagued by daylight robberies.
Boudin’s replacement, Brooke Jenkins, was later accused of nepotism earlier this year after hiring a longtime friend with no legal qualifications to head the department’s Victim Services Division at a salary of $300,000.
High Court Judge Anne-Christine Massulo (pictured) criticised the prosecutor’s office in her ruling, saying she hopes it will in future “prioritise cases appropriately so that justice can be done”.
Prithika Balakrishnan, a law professor at the University of California, San Francisco School of Law, told ABC7 that she believes the reason many alleged victims may never see justice is because of the Supreme Court, which she believes is “a situation the courts put themselves in.”
“San Francisco has not attempted to recover from COVID and bring these cases to trial, even though there were open courtrooms, or even civil cases taking up courtroom space,” he said.
For alleged victims like Bonilla, the decision marks the end of a painful experience under a system meant to help her.
“It is very bad because there are many of us who are victims of domestic violence, we need representation and we need support because we feel that it is not right,” she concluded.
(tags to translate)dailymail