Tips for California Families To Support Children’s Dental Health And Overall Well-Being

By Dr. Paul McConnell, National Dental Director, UnitedHealthcare Dental located in Cypress

Oral health is more than just a bright smile, it’s an important part of a child’s growth, development and overall well-being. Tooth decay is the most common chronic disease among kids in the U.S., affecting nearly half of children ages 2-19. About 1 in 10 children ages 2-5 experience untreated decay, a number that climbs to nearly 1 in 5 by ages 6-8.
Baby teeth play an important role in a child’s development, serving as the foundation for healthy permanent teeth and supporting speech and overall well-being. Moreover, emergency dental care causes children in the U.S. to miss approximately 34 million school hours annually. Good oral health habits and staying on top of dental checkups from an early age can help reduce the risk of developing cavities and other conditions that affect overall health.
Here are some tips for parents to help promote good childhood dental health:
Encourage healthy snacking and hydration. What children eat and drink plays a big role in their oral health. Sugary snacks and drinks feed bacteria that can erode enamel and lead to cavities. Limiting sugar and encouraging plenty of water helps rinse away food particles, dilute acids, and support healthy saliva flow. Adding nutrient‑rich foods like fruits, vegetables, cheese and yogurt provides calcium and vitamin D to help keep teeth and bones strong.
Make preventive dental care part of your routine. Regular preventive dental care may help to catch issues early on, helping reduce the risk of more serious — and costly — problems down the road. For kids, untreated cavities can result in poor nutrition and potentially stunt growth and development. Oral health can also be linked to health conditions like diabetes and heart disease, making it important to take advantage of preventive services from a young age. Many dental plans cover preventive services such as exams, cleanings, x-rays and sealants. Call the number on the back of your dental insurance card to find out what your specific plan covers. 
A child’s first dental visit should be scheduled after their first tooth appears and no later than their first birthday. After that, kids should see the dentist every six months.
Promote a positive dental experience. Dental fear and anxiety is quite common — one third of young kids around the world experience it. Dental visits may include the use of instruments or services that can seem scary. Regular visits to the dentist may help kids get more comfortable and help make the experience more familiar. Parents can help ease nerves by explaining what to expect, answering questions or using books or videos to help kids feel prepared and confident.
Provide guidance for good dental hygiene. While parents may want to supervise brushing until at least age 8 to ensure proper technique, education around oral health can begin much earlier. Encourage brushing twice daily with an ADA-approved toothpaste. Introduce flossing when two teeth touch. This helps teach children that cleaning between teeth is just as important as brushing. Parents can make dental care fun by letting kids choose toothbrushes in their favorite colors, turning brushing time into a family activity, singing songs or setting timers to help them stay engaged.
Replace toothbrushes regularly. Change toothbrushes every three to four months, or sooner if bristles are frayed. During cold and flu season, replace toothbrushes after being sick to avoid reintroducing germs to the body.
Encouraging healthy dental habits and staying consistent with preventive care from a young age may help children grow up with strong smiles, fewer health complications and the confidence that comes with a lifetime of good oral health.

Tort Tax Is A Burden We All Share

New Report Measures the Impact Of Lawsuit Abuse
Adds To The Already High Cost Of Living In California

By Victor Gomez, Executive Director, Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
It seems the buzzword captivating Americans these days is “affordability”. Yet everywhere you go, prices still seem to be increasing here in California. We’re all seeking relief from the high costs of living, with no end in sight. This trend is already being compounded by a hidden cost driver known as the “tort tax”, which this year totals $2,567 for each Californian. This number represents the hidden tax and the extra burden every Californian pays per year to compensate for California’s overly litigious climate. Along with high costs, lawsuit abuse also leads to 850,915 jobs lost throughout the state, which notably already has the highest tax rates and unemployment rates in the nation.
Every day, thousands of small business owners face lawsuits, all based on technical violations, where no one was really harmed. We might not think much of it, but we should.
Consider the case of one restaurant owner: someone who survived the economic hardships of the pandemic and California’s stagnant economy, only to face an unwarranted Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit because the dining room table in her restaurant was 1/16 of an inch too low. It cost this restaurant owner $11,000 to settle this case, showing just how real and costly lawsuit abuse can be for small business owners.
The question is, who really pays for this? The answer is simple—we all do.
The newly released Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse Report titled “The Economic Benefits of Tort Reform,” compiled by the Perryman Group, an economic consulting firm, details the results of how lawsuit abuse impacts every person in California through higher costs, lost jobs, and less economic activity.
The report highlights how an overly aggressive litigious environment is draining California’s economy, showcased by a significant slowdown in growth and more and more lost jobs. An inadequately balanced civil justice system can be counterproductive, driving up the costs and risks of doing business, disincentivizing innovations, and increasing everyday costs.
The total current impact of excessive tort costs on California’s economy includes losses of $101.2 billion in gross product each year, according to the report. Californians lose more than $64.5 billion a year in direct costs related to the production of goods and services.
Business activity generates tax revenue, and the business activity losses due to excessive tort costs reduce receipts to the federal, state, and local governments. California’s state government revenue is losing an excess of $5.3 billion annually, and local government revenue is down $4.4 billion.
Enacting tort reforms will enhance product innovation, increase productivity, and lower overall costs for California citizens. These reforms will also increase the efficiency of the economy, strengthen the competitiveness of the state’s businesses, and improve the climate for economic development, helping states win the competition for desirable corporate locations and expansions.
Unfortunately for all Californians, Governor Gavin Newsom and the legislature continue to turn a blind eye to reforming the civil justice system, even if it means helping small business owners avoid being targets of shakedown Americans With Disabilities Act lawsuits.
Attempts to reform the abuse of the Americans with Disabilities Act have gone on for more than 25 years. California small business owners had a chance last year to enact productive reform through Senate Bill SB 84, a bipartisan bill authored by Senator Roger Niello, but the Assembly Judiciary Committee refused to assign the bill a hearing date. In doing so, lawmakers effectively blocked meaningful reform, an act that is anti-democratic and directly undermines economic growth. Even liberal state Senators like Senator Ben Allen said, “‘let’s fix this problem,” during the Senate hearing covering SB 84. The legislation would give businesses 120 days to fix the problem or face consequences. SB 84 has a chance to move forward in 2026, giving lawmakers an opportunity to finally deliver balanced, meaningful reform.
Reforming California’s overly litigious system would help give Californians relief from unnecessary costs. Imagine what you could do with a little extra money in your pocket each year. Wouldn’t you like to have an extra $2,567 to spend this year on the things you want?

San Bernardino County DA Pursuing Murder Charges In 1996 Rama Noodle Factory Killing

The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office is pursuing a first degree murder case against a former Ontario-based businessman, more than 29 years after his alleged killing of one of his employees when that employee sought to blackmail him over labor law violations that were taking place at the noodle plant where the alleged murderer was the operations manager.
Woravit Mektrakarn, who has been charged with murder in what is believed to have been the November 23, 1996 death of Luis Osvaldo Diego Garcia, has been the primary suspect in Garcia’s disappearance from the outset. He was arrested two days after Garcia was last seen, but released shortly thereafter when prosecutors felt there was insufficient evidence available at that time to bring him to trial. In short order, Mektrakarn left the United States, fleeing it was believed to either Thailand, the land of his birth, or Cambodia or Burma. It was believed and later established that he was living under a falsified identity between Burma and Cambodia and had been able to transit between those two countries and Thailand largely on the strength of his personal wealth and the social standing of his family. The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs, the U.S. State Department, the International Liaison Office of the FBI and Interpol for a quarter of a century conducted a manhunt for Mektrakarn unsuccessfully.
For years, the case lay dormant until in April 2024, an individual believed to be Mektrakarn was observed to be residing in Bangkok under an alias and in disguise. After authorities were alerted, at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs and U.S. Embassy in Bangkok, the Royal Thai Police in Bangkok moved in upon Mektrakarn, who initially claimed a different identity. Thai law enforcement, however, confirmed who he was and held him in custody. Over a period of more than 20 months, an extradition process wound its way through Thai courts. On January 16, 2026, Mektrakarn was extradited to the United States and transported to San Bernardino by the U.S. Marshals Service.
Luis Osvaldo Diego Garcia, born on August 27, 1972 in Veracruz, Mexico, illegally entered the United States through the border at San Ysidro it is believed in April 1993 at the age of 20. He did not register his presence as an alien as required by U.S. Law. He took up residence in home in Ontario among a household of other undocumented immigrants, including two of his cousins. In Ontario, he found employment at noodle factory in that city, Rama Foods, was owned by Wichart Mektrakarn, a wealthy Thai businessman. The Rama Foods operation in Ontario was overseen by Woravit Mektrakarn, who also went by the informal first name Kim. Woravit Mektrakarn was a 1985 graduate of El Camino Real High School in Placentia. Mektrakarn’s wife, Aree, also worked for the the company in a management or administrative capacity.
By 1996, Garcia had been working at Rama Foods for two years, having obtained the job through his cousin, Rene Delgado, who had been working at the plant at least since 1987.   Rene Delgado worked for Rama Foods in the capacity of chauffeur, mechanic, translator, and liaison between the Mektrakarns and the plant workers, the vast majority of whom could not speak English.
The factory’s production workers consisted almost exclusively of undocumented immigrants, working in substandard conditions and provided with low wages at or marginally above minimum wage. Many of the company’s employees worked six days a week and 11-hour to 12-hour days, without being compensated for overtime.
At some point in the late summer or fall of 1996, Garcia became aware that the company was in violation of California’s labor laws, according to court documents, and threatened to report Mektrakarn to the state labor commission. Mektrakarn, in a bargaining session which was translated and in part brokered by Rene Delgado, agreed to pay Garcia $5,000 in exchange for dropping the issue. Mektrakarn paid him $1,000 up front with a promise of further like installments, with the proviso that Garcia keep silent about the deal and not inform any of the other employees at Rama about the arrangement.
Garcia had not returned to Mexico since coming to the United States and had arranged to make a return trip home, having purchased an airline ticket to fly to Veracruz, Mexico on December 8, 1996, so that he could visit his family.
Despite Garcia’s assurance to Mektrakarn that he would remain silent about the $5,000 hush money deal, at least two others who worked at Rama Foods beside Garcia and Rene Delgado – Garcia’s other cousin Francisco Delgado and an individual named Epifanio Flores – learned that Mektrakarn was providing Garcia with money in addition to his wages at the noodle plant, as did another of Garcia’s cousins, Guillermo Ramirez, who was residing in Fontana.  Mektrakarn learned that Garcia was not holding up his end of the bargain when Flores began pressing to be paid $5,000.
Guillermo Ramirez, who lived in Fontana and has variously been described as Garcia’s “friend” and “cousin,” was with Garcia earlier in the day on November 23, 1996 at Ramirez’s apartment in Fontana. He testified that Garcia said that he was going to get money from Woravit Mektrakarn that day and Garcia had plans to return to Fontana, where they intended to go out to dinner later that evening. Ramirez testified that Garcia left Ramirez’s apartment in Fontana for Rama Foods between 3 and 4 p.m. on November 23, 1996.
That day, a Saturday, Garcia came to the plant, located at 1486 East Cedar Street in Ontario, to pick up what was supposed to be a $3,000 installment toward the agreed-upon $5,000.
Francisco Delgado later testified that on November 23, 1996, he arrived at the Rama Foods plant at 7:00 a.m. and later that morning drove Mektrakarn to Ontario International Airport to rent a Plymouth Voyager minivan.   According to Francisco, Mektrakarn returned to the plant in the rented minivan at “around 5:00 in the afternoon.”   Rene Delgado testified that he arrived at the plant at 8 a.m., and saw Mektrakarn there at 3 p.m. At that time, Mektrakarn’s usual car, a Honda Passport, was in the parking lot, according to Rene Delgado. At 4 p.m., Mektrakarn told Rene Delgado he was expecting Garcia to arrive.
Francisco Delgado recalled seeing Chansak “Buck” Plengsangtip, the factory manager and close friend and associate of of Woravit Mektrakarn, arrived at Rama Foods at around 4 p.m. Francisco Delgado testified he saw Plengsangtip park his car, a brown or tan Mercedes Benz, in the parking lot and walk toward the offices. According to Ramirez, Garcia left Ramirez’s apartment in Fontana for Rama Foods between 3 and 4 p.m. Rene Delgado saw Garcia at the plant at 5 p.m. Francisco and another employee, Julio Zamudio, saw Garcia arrive at 5 p.m. According to Francisco Delgado, Garcia arrived in his own car and walked toward the office area. Testimony placed Garcia’s car in the plant parking lot until about 5:30 p.m. Zamudio saw Garcia enter the plant area through one of the roll-up doors, and walk toward the office area.
At 5 p.m., Aree Mektrakarn called Rene Delgado into the plant’s north office to translate for Garcia. According to Rene Delgado’s testimony, there were five people in the office other than  himself:  Plengsangtip, Garcia, Woravit Mektrakarn, Aree Mektrakarn and Woravit Mektrakarn’s sister Vicky Mektrakarn. Woravit Mektrakarn and Aree Mektrakarn told Rene Delgado they were going to pay Garcia the rest of the money. Rene Delgado did not witness the payment.   Aree Mektrakarn told Rene Delgado to clean the area in the back of the plant, and Rene Delgado left the office with Aree Mektrakarn. Rene Delgado thought Aree Mektrakarn’s request strange, he later testified, because cleaning was not a part of his normal duties. He also testified that when he was in the office that afternoon, he saw two large, clean metal pots, handcuffs, and a handheld radio, and that when he wanted to return to the office later, Aree Mektrakarn would not allow him back in the office, Rene Delgado did not complete the cleaning assignment. Instead, he left for home at 5:30 p.m. As he did so, he drove by the outside door to the north office and looked through the window. Inside the office, he saw three men, at least two of whom appeared to be hiding or crouching. At that time, Garcia’s, Woravit Mektrakarn’s, and Plengsangtip’s cars were still in the parking lot, according to Rene Delgado, but Woravit Mektrakarn’s rented minivan was no longer there.   Earlier, when Francisco Delgado testified his usual duties included moving everyone’s cars inside the plant near the end of the day.   Between 6 p.m and 6:30 p.m. on November 23, 1996, he said, he tried to enter the office area to retrieve car keys to move the cars and park them inside the plant, but Aree Mektrakarn did not allow him in the office area. This was the first time he had not been allowed to move the cars inside the plant, Francisco Delgado testified, and he said he left the plant at 7 p.m. At that time, he noticed that Plengsantip’s car was still in the parking lot.
During the afternoon, Woravit Mektrakarn ordered another employee, Julio Zamudio, to stack pallets in front of the south office door.   This prevented access to the offices from the plant area.  Zamudio used a forklift to begin stacking the pallets, and Woravit Mektrakarn completed the task. The stack was heavy and as high as the top of the office door, according to Zamudio’s later testimony, in which he said the stack was in place before he saw Garcia arrive at 5 p.m. During the 14 years Zamudio worked at the plant, he had never seen a stack of pallets blocking the office door, he testified.  Zamudio also testified that another worker at the plant with the first name Adolfo was not allowed to count his sales route money inside the office that afternoon, as Adolfo usually did.
Garcia was not seen by either of his cousins, friends or acquaintances after that. The evening of November 23, 1996, Garcia did not return to Ramirez’s Fontana apartment with the money he said he was going to obtain from Woravit Mektrakarn to go out for the dinner as had been Garcia’s stated intention earlier that day.  Both Rene Delgado and Francisco Delgado, who knew Garcia was expecting to receive money from Woravit Mektrakarn on November 23, did not see or hear from him after approximately 5 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on November 23, 1996 Garcia had a plane ticket for a scheduled flight to Veracruz, Mexico on December 8, 1996, and was intending to visit relatives over the course of several days thereafter, but did not show up at the airport.
At some point on or between late Saturday November 23, Sunday November 24 and the morning of Monday November 25, 1996, the Ontario Police Department was contacted by Francisco Delgado, and by mid-morning November 25, 1996, a homicide investigation was underway.
When Francisco arrived at work on the morning of November 25, he later testified, he entered the plant through the office area and noticed that the carpet was “cut up and dirty.”   It looked as though some liquid had been spilled on it, he told the court, and he said it did not appear that way when he last saw it on Saturday morning, November 23, 1996.
Homicide investigators with the Ontario Police Department were present on the grounds of the Rama Noodle Plant by 9 a.m.  Forensic supervisor Steve Hall arrived at Rama Foods crime at 10:15 p.m., and joined the investigation.  When Hall arrived, Woravit Mektrakarn was present and had injuries on both his hands.
Hall testified about several items the police found in a dumpster 50 feet from the office area.  Among those were a large metal pot wrapped in two plastic bags. There was ash inside the pot, and it looked as though someone tried to burn evidence in it, according to Hall. The investigators found in the dumpster a plastic bucket with burned carpet inside, and another three pieces of carpet that had been fused together by burning. Hall also found a small, triangular piece of carpet matching a triangular hole found in the south office carpeting, together with a can of lighter fluid with about one inch of liquid inside it, a pair of blue jeans stained white by bleach and with cleaning fluid on them, a yellow glove and pink velvet soap material, the same sort of fluid found on the rug in the north office, and an original fax cover sheet with Plengsantip’s company’s  “Lanna Trading” letterhead at the top of it.
According to Hall, a piece of rug from the north office, carpet in the office hallway along the west wall, carpet next to the triangular-shaped hole in the south office and the area inside the office bathroom sink trap all tested positive for the presence of blood or blood stains. Hall also testified that two handguns were found at the scene.
Investigators interpreted the blood evidence to indicate Garcia was standing against the office wall when he was violently attacked, after which he was forcibly moved toward or perhaps dragged down the hallway and assaulted a second time in the bathroom.
The Plymouth Voyager minivan Woravit Mektrakarn had rented was nowhere to be found, and was reported as stolen. Garcia’s vehicle, a gray Tercel, was gone.
Woravit Mektrakarn was arrested for Garcia’s murder. Investigators knew, or had access to information to indicate, that Plengsangtip, Aree Mektrakarn and Vicky Mektrakarn were present in the Rama plant’s office on November 23. They were not taken into custody, however, and it is not clear from the available record as to whether Plengsangtip or Vicky Mektrakarn were interrogated at that time.

When no direct evidence turned up to establish that Garcia was actually dead and no further evidence beyond that in the dumpster or the office was found, prosecutors informed the Ontario Police Department that they had insufficient evidence upon which to convict, and Woravit Mektrakarn was released. In relatively short order, he, Aree Mektrakarn and Vicky Mektrakarn left the United States for Thailand.

On December 4, 1996, Garcia’s grey Tercel car was found in Los Angeles with its key in the ignition and the tank full of gasoline.

The Plymouth Voyager minivan Kim had rented and which National Rent-A-Car had reported stolen, was found in the parking garage of the Rio Hotel in Las Vegas on December 15, 1996, missing its license plates. It was locked, its ignition had not been punched out, and it did not appear to have been broken into. Internally, it smelled of bleach, and there was indication that a substantial amount of bleach had been poured onto the vehicle’s floor and rear compartment. .

ato visit relatives,  condition that Garcia tell no one else about the arrangement. Garcia agreed, but afterwards one of his coworkers found out and also demanded money.At ane were in substandard conditions. Authorities believe Garcia was murdered by the factory owner, Woravit “Kim” Mektrakarn. A photo of Mektrakarn is posted with this case summary.

Many employees at the factory worked twelve-hour days, six days a week for a total of 72 hours, but they were not paid the overtime wages entitled to them by law. Garcia

Garcia planned to collect $3,000 from Mektrakarn on the day of his disappearance, and was last seen at the factory asking for the money. Two of his cousins, Francisco and Rene Delgado, both of whom worked in the factory, knew Garcia planned to meet Mektrakarn and get his money that day.

On the morning of November 23, Francisco drove Mektrakarn to the Ontario International Airport to rent a Plymouth Voyager minivan. According to Francisco, Mektrakarn drove the minivan to the factory at 5:00 p.m. Rene said he saw Mektrakarn at the factory by 3:00 p.m. and Mektrakarn’s usual car, a Honda Passport, was in the parking lot at the time. At 4:00 p.m., Mektrakarn told Rene he expected Garcia to arrive.

Rene acted as a translator and liaison between Mektrakarn and the workers. He was summoned to the factory’s north office at 5:00 p.m. to translate. Rene stated that Garcia, Mektrakarn, Kim’s wife, Kim’s sister, and Chansak “Buck” Plengsangtip, who was Mektrakarn’s friend and the factory’s manager, were all in the office. Mektrakarn and his wife told Delgado they would pay Garcia what he asked.

Mektrakarn’s wife then asked Rene to go clean the back of the plant, and she left the office with him. Rene found her request strange because cleaning was not one of his usual duties. He wanted to go back to the office, but Mektrakarn’s wife wouldn’t let him.

He didn’t complete the cleaning and instead left the factory at 5:30 p.m. As he drove by, he looked in the north office window and saw three men, two of whom appeared to be hiding or crouching. Garcia’s, Mektrakarn’s and Plengsangtip’s cars were in the parking lot, but Mektrakarn’s rented van was gone.

One of Francisco’s duties was to move everyone’s cars inside the factory at the end of the day. He tried to go to the office area for the car keys between 6:00 and 6:30 p.m., but Mektrakarn’s wife wouldn’t let him inside. This was the first time Francisco hadn’t been allowed to move the cars. He left the premises at 7:00 p.m. Another employee usually counted the sales route money inside the office, but he was also prevented from entering the office that day.

Garcia had plans go out to dinner with a cousin afterwards, but he never showed up. He had purchased a plane ticket to Veracruz to visit relatives in December, but never used it. He has never been heard from again. His gray Toyota Tercel was found in Los Angeles, California on December 4, with the keys in the ignition and the tank full of gasoline.

Authorities never believed Garcia left of his own accord. He is described as a happy, friendly young man who got along with most people. He moved to the United States in 1993, made friends with local immigrants, and lived with roommates in a house in Ontario. He was looking forward to visiting his parents in Mexico, as he had not seen them in years.

Responding to the concerns of Garcia’s friends, the police went to Rama Foods on November 25 and began a homicide investigation into his disappearance. Francisco stated the office carpet was dirty and looked as if liquid had spilled on it, and a triangular piece had been cut out. The carpet hadn’t looked that way the last time Francisco saw it, on the morning of November 23.

Mektrakarn was present when the police arrived and he had injuries on his hands. In a nearby dumpster were a plastic bucket with a piece of burned carpet inside, three pieces of burned carpet stuck together, a lighter fluid can with about an inch of fluid inside, a pair of bleach-stained blue jeans with cleaning fluid on them, liquid soap, rubber gloves, scouring pads and a metal pot filled with ashes and wrapped in two plastic bags. Two handguns were located at the scene.

Traces of blood were visible on the carpet in the Rama Foods office, the carpet in the office hallway, and in the sink trap of the office bathroom. Mektrakarn’s rented van was reported stolen and was located at the Rio Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada on December 15. When found it was clean, the license plates were missing and bleach had been poured all over the interior.

One of the Ontario Police Department’s homicide investigators, Byron Lee, maintained an intense interest in the case. eLee was convince that Ontario police Detective Byron Lee, the lead investigator on the case, believing Mektrakarn’s virtual immediate departure for Thailand after his release from custody in 1996 could not be interpreted any other way than that he was responsible for Garcia’s disappearance. As a consequence of his dedication, Lee was made the lead investigator. Still, the matter languished for weeks, then months and years.

In 2003, Lee and his team developed a DNA profile for Garcia and thereby, through comparisons with the evidence gathered on November 25, 1996, established the blood on the carpet was Garcia’s. A search of the factory more than six years after the fact was made, with forensic technicians spraying the office with fluorescein. That examination found spatters on the walls, floor and ceiling of the office and in the hallway and bathroom that were not visible previously.

The detectives next aggressively interrogated Plengsangtip, who unlike Mektrakarn, Mektrakarn’s wife and Mektrakarn’s sister, had not fled the country but was living in Granada Hills. The detectives concluded Plengsangtip was lying about what had occurred on November 23, 1996 and built a case against him, which then-District Attorney Mike Ramos, Assistant District Attorney Mike Fermin and  deputy district attorneys Mark Vos and Debbie Ploghaus bought, which held that Plengsangtip was an accessory to Garcia’s murder in that he was present when it occurred even if he did not take part in it and that he had actively assisted Mektrakern in covering it up.

Plengsangtip’s acknowledgement that he was at the noodle factory on the night of the disappearance was enough, San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge Barry Plotkin in October 2005 ruled, for prosecutors to proceed to trial against Plengsangtip on the accessory charge, despite the defendant’s insistence he knew nothing whatsoever about what befallen Garcia.

In 2006, however, Judge Ingrid Uhler overruled Plotkin, reasoning that Plengsangtip had made no admission of any knowledge of the disappearance or murder and that the district attorney’s office’s presumption that he was lying was just that – a presumption – and insufficient, without any further evidence of Plengsangtip’s involvement or knowledge of a crime, insufficient as the basis for prosecuting him as being an accessory to a murder, which had yet to be established as having occurred,

Rather than taking Judge Uhler’s ruling as an indication that there were gaps in their case, the district attorney’s office thereafter appealed her ruling to the Fourth Appellate District, arguing that there were grounds to indicate that something violent had occurred on the grounds of the noodle factory on November 23, 1996 and that Plengsangtip, as the manager of operations there and who acknowledged he was present, lacked credibility when he told investigators that he knew nothing about what had occurred that day. While someone cannot be prosecuted for having knowledge about a crime and not reporting it to authorities, Plengsangtip crossed the line when he actively lied about what went on at the noodle plant, prosecutors said.

If you want to read the remainder of this article, find a copy of the February 13 edition of the SBC Sentinel.

Deputies On The Prowl To Convince Homeless To Leave San Bernardino County

In the days just ahead of a jury in a federal civil case originating out of San Bernardino County awarding a man crippled by the aggressive response of a sheriff’s deputy $27 million, the sheriff’s department elected to roll the dice by escalating the intensity of its operations in clearing the homeless out of the county.
While a fair number of county employees have expressed concerns that the heavy-handed, indeed ruthless and sometimes oppressively violent methods applied by the sheriff’s department are increasingly likely to result in dire or fatal consequences, those at the middle and command levels of the department are intent on resolving the homeless issue to the satisfaction of an increasingly callous public frustrated with the growing presence of the homeless population and the county’s political leadership, who measure progress on the issue in the reduction of its visibility.
Most of those involved are confident the indigent being encouraged to leave do not have the wherewithal to bring federal suits that might possibly cost the county any money.
The three highest ranking members of the county who are detailed to managing the county’s homeless crisis, Department of Behavioral Health Director Georgina Yoshioka and her assistants Jennifer Alsina and Marina Espinosa are said to be personally disturbed, in one case acutely emotionally to the point of tears, by the way in which the sheriff’s department employs brutality and violence against the county’s homeless population, most notably males between the approximate ages of 17 to 55, but are unwilling to offer resistance to what is occurring out of the belief that in doing so they would incur the wrath of the board of supervisors, Assistant Executive Officer Diane Rundles, Deputy Executive officer Victor Tordesillas, risking their employment status with the county.
Official homeless figures in San Bernardino County have varied over the last decade and a half. At the behest of the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, local governments carry out what is referred to as a point in time count of the homeless living within their jurisdictions, traditionally, with some fluctuation, on a single day during the final two weeks of January.
Data from the 2025 Point-In-Time Count identified a total of 3,821 homeless individuals countywide. That figure reflects a decrease of 434 individuals, or 14.2 percent, compared to 2024.
In January 2024, there were 4,237 adults and children counted as homeless during the 2024 24-hour long survey. In January 2023, officials gave varying counts of 4,194 and 4,195 people located and tallied as homeless.
In 2022, the point-in-time count found 3,333 total homeless in the county, including 944 who were sheltered and 2,389 who were unsheltered.
In 2021 the point-in-time homeless count for San Bernardino County was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
A total of 3,125 individuals were counted as homeless in San Bernardino County during the 2020 point-in-time count.
In 2019, 2,607 homeless individuals were counted in San Bernardino County during the annual poin-in-time count.
In 2018, 2,118 people were counted as identified homeless in San Bernardino County.
In, 2017, 1,866 homeless people were tallied in San Bernardino County.
According to the point-in time count conducted in 2016, there were 1,887 homeless within the confines of San Bernardino County in 2016.
In 2015, there were 2,140 homeless counted in San Bernardino.
In 2014, there were 3,821 homeless counted during that year’s point-in-time count.
There were 2,321 people cataloged as homeless during the 2013 point-in-time count in San Bernardino County in 2013.
There were 2,876 homeless in San Bernardino County counted in 2012.
In 2011, the number of homeless counted throughout San Bernardino County was 3,431.
There are multiplicity of factors contributing to the differing totals, year-to-year and opposite trends, up-and-down. A major factor consisted in the actual fluctuation in the number experiencing homelessness within the county’s 20,105-square mile confines at different times. Another factor consists of the intimidation factor employed by the county’s various law enforcement agencies in the day of or days and weeks prior to the count. Raids and sweeps of homeless encampments, including “clobbering time” operations in which law enforcement officers would rough up those living in parks, on sidewalks, in alleyways, in abandoned or vacant buildings, in landscaping along freeways or near freeway on-ramps, beneath overpasses and train trestles, in drainage channels, on river banks and river beds and other obscure areas have taken place at all times of the year, including in January in the days and weeks prior to the homeless counts being conducted. Often accompanying those carrying out the point-in-time surveys are law enforcement officers. In the cities of Chino, Montclair, Upland, Ontario, Fontana, Rialto, Colton, San Bernardino, Redlands and Barstow, each of which has its own municipal police department, those officers are generally police officers. In all other cities and incoporated towns in the county, which contract with the sheriff’s department for the provision of law enforcement service, and in the unincorporated county areas, the officers accompanying the surveyors are almost universally San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department deputies. County officials and the sheriff’s department insist that having deputies present during the point-in-time count is “entirely appropriate,” as there are “valid safety concerns” with regard to county employees and volunteers making “unsolicited approaches” to a “sometimes volatile” element of the population. The deputies are on hand primarily for “security reasons,” according to the sheriff’s department, and any suggestions that the deputies are interfering with the accurate compiling of the survey data “is unsupported by any evidence.”
Despite that assertion, circumstances suggest that the other purposes to which sheriff’s deputies have been put creates an atmosphere, when they accompany those who are supposed to be tallying the number of homeless in a given area, that is less than consistent with obtaining an accurate count.
A degree of doublespeak attends the sheriff’s department’s interaction with the homeless in San Bernardino County. The department has used all the skill of a Madison Avenue approach in branding its effort toward “homeless outreach” in the most benign of terms, referring to its various programs, which are essentially indistinguishable, as Operation Shelter Me; Project H.O.P.E., which stands for Homeless Outreach Proactive Enforcement; Operation Inroads; or presenting it as part of the department’s SOP effort, with SOP being an acronym standing for solution-oriented policing. In all of its public pronouncements, while CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN or Fox News cameras are rolling or in the presence of Los Angeles Times,San Bernardino Sun or other print media reporters, the department’s spokesmen and spokeswomen or its deputies emphasize how dedicated they are totrying to “help” the homeless by getting them off the streets. When no one else is looking on and the deputies find themselves face to face with the homeless, they default to what the department’s actual goal is, which is to adhere to what the politicians in the county and the cities where they work – the members of the county board of supervisors, 12 of the county’s city councils and two of its town councils – want, which is for homeless to simply go away. In the starkest of practical terms, the indigent are not going to be persuaded to leave by authority figures who are nice to them. The approach that San Bernardino County law enforcement agencies take is to dispense with the artificial show and pretense of compassion that takes place when the wider world is looking on and deliver the homeless the officers confront that it would be best for them to go someplace else.
Sometimes, the homeless are told that some form of assistance or shelter is available to them.
These offers of help occasionally succeed in having the targeted population willingly or of their own accord allow their possessions to be discarded. Occasionally, the officers will follow up with delivering the homeless to an actual shelter or homeless assistance facility where they can make an application for inclusion in some type of program aimed at assistance. On rare occasions, the individual might be provided with a voucher that is good for an overnight stay at a motel. More often these are empty assurances that are not real but are useful in getting the homeless to cooperate in giving up their belongings.
A central element of the strategy used by the sheriff’s department in particular in San Bernardino County to rid the various communities of the homeless is to take their possessions away, most particularly those possessions that make living under the stars bearable.
The ground is an excellent conductor of heat. As such, those who must sleep on it without at least one layer of insulation can become very cold and uncomfortable at night. Recurrently, the homeless utilize two or three such layers of makeshif insulation – cardboard, blankets or sleeping bags or a combination thereof – as their nighttime bedding.
Typically, sheriff’s department deputies assigned to deal with the homeless arrive at homeless encampments, where they insist that layers of cardboard used as insulation from the ground as well as blankets, bedding, sleeping bags and tents which the impoverished use to make it through the night are declared, in the deputies’ words, “debris.” There is no arguing about this. The inhabitants must accept the deputies’ definitions or receive a sound thrashing. The deputies then insist that the debris be thrown away along with whatever trash happens to be lying around. When the target population proves uncooperative and is unwilling to part with bedding, tents or cooking/eating utensils, cookware and the like, the deputies will escalate the matter and engage in a heavy-handed showing of force in which they will set hands upon the homeless, rough them up or beat them, ultimately seizing their property, which is then thrown away. This tends to result in any others at the encampment who have witnessed what befell the first set of the denizens of their community to either leave at once to go elsewhere or comply when the deputies turn their attention to them.
At least since the tenure of John McMahon, who became sheriff in 2013 and remained in that post through two election cycles in 2014 and 2018 until voluntarily resigning upon maxing out his pension in 2021, the department has made a practice of utilizing generally young and physically fit deputies very often ones who engage in body building practices involving the use of anabolic steroids, to deal with the homeless. The reason for this is four-fold. Younger deputies generally have less empathy and a higher disgust level for both older individuals and those in squalid conditions than do older deputies. Sympathy or empathy is antithetical to the sheriff’s department’s goal of simply disposing of the homeless. The overt physicality of younger deputies serves as an intimidation factor which heightens their command presence and in most cases results in compliance with their demands without the need to actually use force. The third reason is that one of the side-effects of steroid use is “roid rage,” which is a state of irritability that accompanies the prolonged use of anabolic substances and will manifest in an outburst of anger, aggression, or violence on the part of the user if he encounters a challenge, frustration or any difficult situation. In this way, a homeless individual’s refusal to depart with, for example, his sleeping bag or blanket or tent, might trigger an act of aggression on the part of the deputy that is then normally resolved with the homeless person being convinced or forced to part with his or her possessions or, as the department terms it, “debris.” The third reason is that by employing young deputies who use anabolic steroids in assignments in which they deal with the homeless as opposed to circumstances in which they encounter more economically and socially well-adapted individuals, the department minimizes the liability risk that can arise from the aggression of those deputies and the excessive force they are prone to using, given that the homeless generally do not possess the wherewithal to retain, hire or obtain an attorney to make a legal issue over their treatment by a member of the department.
In recent years, some homeless have adapted to the approach and tactics of the department by using wheeled containers such as shopping carts, baby buggies, strollers or wagons onto or into which they load their possessions, including tents, sleeping bags, blankets, stoves and the like. When confronted by deputies who insist that their sleeping gear or other possessions are debris, the homeless can simply load those items into their movable containers and pull or push it away, thereby not being forced to surrender their possessions. Deputies, however, have come up with a counter to this, consisting of the department’s canine units. The dogs kept by the department’s handlers consist primarily of detention, apprehension and tracking dogs. There are multiple types of tracking dogs, ones which are used to sniff out drugs or weapons or cadavers or to locate those who are either lost in wilderness area or seeking to elude capture. Apprehension dogs are a specialized type of tracking dogs used to capture fugitives, including ones who might be armed. Detention dogs are ones used to, essentially, confine individuals to a circumscribed space of the department’s choosing. In dealing with the homeless who have a wagon, stroller, baby buggy, shopping cart or similar movable container, deputies will bring in a detention or apprehension dog which can be used to tear through the contents of the wheeled container while the deputy holds the homeless individual at bay or the dog can be used to hold the homeless person, who is predictably reluctant to be bitten or mauled, in place while the deputy takes hold of the wheeled container and its contents to dispose of them.
For all of these reasons, the county’s practice of having deputies accompany the point-in-time surveyors has resulted, in cases where the homeless see them coming, those who are intended to be counted making themselves scarce, hiding or otherwise seeking to avoid being confronted and thus eluding being included in that particular year’s tally, even though they might have been counted previously or subsequently. The degree to which this has contributed to the inaccuracy of the counts is, by definition, unknown.
In the aftermath of the 2026 point-in-time count, many of the county’s homeless had their guard down and were relatively confident that they would not have to concern themselves with being confronted by the community’s authorities until spring or at least late this winter.
In the City of Highland, the immediately adjacent section of northeast San Bernardino and the bordering unincorporated county area, primarily because one of the premier destinations for visitors of the county is located there, city and county officials are inveterately self conscious over the presence of the dispossessed milling about. The Yaamava‘ Resort & Casino, with 7,400 slot machines, numerous table games, and a 17-floor hotel, attracts 14 million guests per year. While at least 6 million of those are repeat patrons, both the county and the City of Highland have an interest in constantly putting its best foot forward and making a positive first impression on those who come into the city.
Last week, on February 6, two weeks and two days after the 2026 point-in-time count was conducted on January 22, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s HOPE Team, in tandem with deputies from the Highland Sheriff’s Station, conducted one of its patented Operation Shelter Me confrontations with the residents of the city’s homeless encampments. he ongoing series of encampment-clearing operations aims to connect county staff members with unhoused residents, offering them housing and access to medical care and mental health services while addressing community safety concerns, officials said.