Welcome to Boondoggle Unified

While it's common for the D.A.'s office to take its time filing criminal charges, especially when a civil case is pending, the more-than-two-year delay smacked of retribution. With Santos' back to the wall, a key issue in the criminal case would center on what exactly he removed from the computer on his final visit to the office.

According to court records, the day after Santos' last conversation with Torres, on February 19, 2002, a computer expert named David Chernobieff, hired by Torres, visited the company's offices. Chernobieff analyzed the computers for several days and found a "remnant of a database" on the main hard drive, which was on Santos' computer. More than a week later, on March 1, 2002, LAPD Detective Reinaldo Velez, a certified computer examiner, took custody of and analyzed the hard drive of Santos' computer. He couldn't find any data in Santos' old database. Velez noted the computer had been used in the days since Santos' departure, but despite signs of tainted evidence, his testimony at a preliminary hearing was damaging: "I was not able to find the database that I was told sat there the day before."

Then Torres Construction provided documentation to show that it took 40 employees more than 2,000 hours to re-create data Santos allegedly destroyed. In interviews with federal investigators, Tomas Torres could not cite any credible motive for Santos to take such action, yet things did not look good for the college senior. Suddenly his education being placed on hold was the least of his worries. To make matters worse, Santos' lawyer at the time, Deputy Public Defender Denise Daniels, advised him to plead guilty to commercial burglary, grand theft and theft of trade secrets. This meant jail time. Feeling abandoned, he looked for a private lawyer to fight for him.

As it turned out, his new lawyer and the prosecutor weren't eager to try the case. In one of the more unusual interviews for this story, the prosecutor, Deputy D.A. Jonathan Fairtlough, and Santos' criminal defense lawyer, Robert Bernstein, discussed the case last January in the cafeteria of the Criminal Courts Building. It soon became clear that Fairtlough did not have answers for certain weaknesses in the case. For instance, he could not justify a 10-day delay before Detective Velez took custody of the computer that Santos allegedly wiped clean. Nor could he explain why Chernobieff failed to make a copy of Santos' hard drive as it existed on the morning of February 19, 2002. Bernstein also pointed out that Chernobieff altered the hard drive. These flaws would make it hard, if not impossible, to prove the computer-theft case against Santos. Fairtlough appeared stymied. Two weeks later, he offered a plea bargain. On January 23, Santos pleaded no contest to commercial burglary for taking invoices from Torres Construction. The felony computer-theft charges were dropped. He was sentenced to three years' probation and 90 days of electronic monitoring. Like most classic plea bargains, this one allowed both sides to claim victory.

TheWeeklyreviewedthe safety-inspection files of more than a dozen elementary, middle and high schools. The overall scorecard at those schools, with a few exceptions, ranked from poor to fair. Even after the $10 million in federal funds had been spent for seismic bracing — about $4 million of which went to Torres Construction — more than half the campuses reviewed showed deficiencies during routine inspections from 2002 to 2006.

But, in the end, none of the problems could be pinned on Torres Construction or anyone.

Phillip Moriel, with the Inspector General's Office at the school district, investigated Santos' allegations and says he could not tell if Torres Construction's work was done right. Moriel's boss, Robert Williams, does not offer much more. "It doesn't appear we did much on this investigation. There was not much we could do. There was a box of stuff. It was inconclusive. State law precludes me from giving you all the facts."

Similarly, L.A. Unified's General Counsel's Office declined to comment on allegations of fraud. Alfred Rodas, with the Inspector General's internal-audits group, said that because the case involves federal funds, the person to talk to would be Michael Eugene, head of business services, who reports to schools Superintendent Roy Romer. But neither Romer nor Eugene returned the Weekly's calls for comment.

FEMA was hardly more determined to get to the bottom of things. Despite requests by the Weekly for interviews and comment, the behemoth federal agency showed little interest in the matter. Recently, the agency disclosed a copy of a 2004 report by the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General. The report consists of random site inspections at seven schools, a comparison of bills submitted by Torres Construction to invoices approved by L.A. Unified, and about six interviews, including one with Tomas Torres, who referred federal investigators to LAPD Detective Velez. The report concludes that Torres Construction may have overbilled, that this wasn't intentional, that teachers had moved objects around and that the school district was satisfied with the work.