Madison Aument
For 91.9 KVCR News, I'm Madison Aument. A San Bernardino City Councilwoman has been on trial for the past week. Treasurer Ortiz has been charged with two misdemeanor counts of eavesdropping and has pleaded not guilty. I'm joined by Israel Carreón, who's a reporter with the San Bernardino Sun, and has been reporting on the ins and outs of the trial since it began. Hi Israel.
Israel Carreón
Hi, happy to be here.
Madison Aument
Well, this is kind of a complicated case. So, can you explain exactly why Treasurer Ortiz is on trial?
Israel Carreón
Yeah, sure. It comes all down to consent. Councilmember Ortiz is accused of secretly recording conversations with San Bernardino Police Chief Darren Goodman and Sergeant Jose Loera, who is also the president of the San Bernardino Police Officers Association. Ortiz made recordings on her cell phone using a recording app. Ortiz met with Goodman and Loera to discuss alleged misconduct regarding a police officer searching a law enforcement database for information during her campaign for Ward Seven.
Madison Aument
So, can you explain what California's two-party consent law is and how it pertains to this?
Israel Carreón
Yeah. So, as I understand it, the case hinges on California Penal Code 632, which makes it illegal to intentionally use a recording electronic device to eavesdrop or to record a confidential communication without consent. So, jurors are to decide whether Ortiz violated the 632, whether she intentionally used an electronic device to eavesdrop.
Madison Aument
You wrote that Ortiz's recordings seem to have backfired on her. Why?
Israel Carreón
Yeah. So Ortiz had originally filed about the alleged police misconduct in May 2025 to the police or to the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office, and then she dropped off a flash drive with recordings of Goodman and Loera in August 2025. So while the DA was investigating Ortiz's allegations, they listened to the recordings and then they said that the nature of the investigation had changed because they were now focused on the Ortiz recordings, whether she had recorded them and whether they were confidential or not, and possibly legal.
Madison Aument
Well, what does the San Bernardino District Attorney's Office say?
Israel Carreón
One of the main arguments that the DA is making is that Ortiz did not verbally ask for consent to record the police chief or the sergeant, as in like she didn't use the actual words to say "May I record you" or use the word "recording" or “to record” at all. The defense argues that while she didn't verbally say and use the words "record" or "recording" when asking for consent, she did gesture with her cell phone in plain view of the officers with the screen lit and the recording app active.
Madison Aument
All right, so where do things stand now?
Israel Carreón
Well, it's been eight days since the trial has started, and jurors today heard the prosecution's closing statements and are midway through the defense's arguments, then the prosecution has another attempt to respond to the defense's closing statement. So, the trial is going to resume on Wednesday, and it's expected that they're going to start deliberating then as well. If Ortiz is convicted, she could face 2500 per violation, or a year in county jail, or both.
Madison Aument
Well, thanks for joining us.
Israel Carreón
Thank you so much.
Madison Aument
That was Israel Carreón from the San Bernardino Sun. You can find his reporting at www.sbsun.com. For KVCR News, I'm Madison Aument.