The City of Redlands’ permissive land use policy has once again drawn controversy to itself, most recently involving instances in which city officials have signed off on approving applications to build accessory dwelling units, the plans for those projects and the occupancy permits for those quarters despite violations of city and state construction and development standards and/or failures to abide by the regulations imposed by overlapping governmental or utility jurisdictions or contracts associated with the tract.
In some of those cases, documents needed in the approval review process were apparently forged by city employees, using the names of their former colleagues who no longer work for the city.
Traditionally in California as in virtually all other states, local jurisdictions hold sway over and have the first and last say with regard to land use within their confines.
Zoning, which controls what kind of development – residential, commercial, industrial or recreational -is to take place, along with the tenor of that development. In this way the types of residential development allowed to occur, meaning single family homes, duplexes, condominiums, apartments as well as the density or the number of units per acre are specified in municipal zoning codes. Zoning categories also include industrial and commercial uses, and the gradations applicable to the purposes to which that land is to be put, controlling the intensity of activity to take place on such properties, including the type of stores or enterprises in commercial zones and the nature of logistics or manufacturing operations in industrial areas. The State of California has standards that impose minimal requirements with regard to construction, engineering and fire safety that builders must incorporate in their work. Nevertheless, discretion with regard to allowing projects to proceed, what they are to entail, their intensity and features, enforcement of requirements for providing both onsite and off-site improvements to minimize the impact of the final product on existing, current and future nearby residents in California was vested with local civil authorities, that is municipal or county government and their planning, land use and development staff members, their planning commissions and most pointedly, their elected political leadership bodes, those being town or city councils or the county board of supervisors.
Only relatively recently in response to the widespread perception of a housing crisis in the Golden State and an accompanying rise in the incidence of homelessness has the state government in Sacramento – the governor’s office, the legislature and the California Department of Housing and Community Development commandeered a from local governments land use authority. It has done so in myriad ways, the most prominent of which is what is referred to at the Regional Housing Needs Assessment program, Referred to by the acronym RHNA. Under RHNA, state officials with the California Department of Housing and Community Development examine the circumstances in communities, towns, cities and unincorporated area from around the state and make a determination as to ho many housing units are needed in each jurisdiction to bring the housing crisis to a close. It then assigns to each jurisdiction an allotment, broken into affordability categories – very low income, low income, moderate income and above average income – how many housing units that jurisdiction needs to provide over an eight year planning cycle.
In the case of Redlands, it is being called upon to facilitate the construction of 3,516 new residential units between October 2021 and October 2029. Of those 967 are supposed to be affordable to very low income individuals or families,615 to those of low income, 652 to those of average or moderate income and 1,282 to those with income described as being above moderate. The RHNA plan does not require that the specified number of units actually be constructed but it does require that the city accommodate any developer who seeks to provide housing in the city until the outlined goals are met.
To propel communities, cities and counties toward meeting these underlying housing construction goals, the state had essentially mandated that towns, cities and counties allow the construction of so-called accessory dwelling units on residential properties. Also referred to as granny flats – conjuring an image of a cottage constructed in the backyard of an existing single family residence to accommodate the mother of the home’s owner – these are either detached or in some cases attached structures which include the full range of living quarters extending to a kitchen, dining room or area, living room and/or den, along with a bedroom or bedrooms and a bathroom. In this way, the State of California usurped from towns, cities and counties the limitations they had imposed on density in residential zones, such that each residential lot in the state could now be divided into two lots. While this mandate was not popular in communities which had a tradition of limiting the number of dwelling units per acre to a fixed standard – such as in the Town of Apple Valley which had from its inception adhered to a requirement that homes be built on no lot smaller than a half acre – the state’s authority overrode local authority and California’s cities and towns accepted the mandate and made accommodations for it. Although California Civil Code limits accessory dwelling unit prohibitions via covenants, contracts and deeds associated with a property, this restriction does not apply to reasonable restrictions on accessory dwelling units or what are referred to as junior accessory dwelling units. Thus, contracts are applicable in the planning process, and an owner under contract is bound to the terms of the contract.
Other jurisdictions impose limitations on construction in very high fire danger zones. Rules intended to preserve public safety, health and welfare must be adhered to in accommodating accessory dwelling units, imposing limits on what a property owner can construct.
In Redlands, historically and currently more than in any other city in San Bernardino County, there is a contingent of civically involved and vocal opponents of aggressive development, which through the voter initiative process has obtained passage of local measures which put defined limits on the intensity of development that can take place in Redlands. For nearly a generation and up until currently, the building industry has through intensive political activity, including hefty donations to elected city leadership, installed a predominantly pro-development city council at Redlands City Hall, which in turn, has appointed an equally pro-development planning commission overseeing the city’s community development department and planning division.
The controlled-growth forces in Redlands are now decrying a perceived trend by Redlands officials by which the city’s community development, planning and public works departments and division are allowing virtually unregulated use of the accessory dwelling unit application and approval process to allow landowners, developers, builders and contractors to dispense entirely with construction standards.
While state law and mandates require towns, cities and counties to allow those who want to construct an accessory dwelling unit on their residential property to do so, those state and local regulations with regard to construction standards as well as associated property deed contract restrictions  yet apply, and the regulations pertaining to infrastructure and utility accommodations for those projects cannot, legally, be suspended nor waived by the responsible jurisdictional agency or property owner.
Documentation obtained by the Sentinel through Redlands residents shows a pattern of city officials processing accessory dwelling unit applications with no regard for, in multiple cases, the city’s own codes and regulations, state statutes, regional regulations, and public health, safety and welfare restrictions.
Those seeking to construct an accessory dwelling unit are still subject to applying with the city for and obtaining a building permit and complying with a host of requirements or standards applicable to any and all construction projects.
Unknown is the number of accessory dwelling units that have been constructed in the city in the last three years, primarily because some homeowners have undertaken the construction of such structures without going through the city application process. City officials, apparently, have been accommodating of such flagrant violations of the law, and have been willing to look the other way as they have learned of such activity.
In the cases where the application process has been followed, it is easier to ascertain when and when not those undertaking to construct an accessory dwelling unit complied with the regulations they were subject to or were supposed to be subject to. In multiple such cases, it can be demonstrated by available records, corners were cut, either by contractors, subcontractors, owners or the city and its employees. In others still, it appears that there have serious suspensions of the regulations that are intended to ensure public safety and public health. In some of those cases, the plans submitted were out of compliance with city standards, but the project was allowed to proceed. In others still, it appears, there was no physical inspection of the project at any of several crucial milestones toward completion, such that what was actually constructed was inconsistent with the plans submitted for the project. In at least a handful of cases, “phantom” city officials – ones who formerly worked for the city but are no longer employed by Redlands – were listed as reviewing, commenting on, approving and/or “signing” documents certifying “compliance,” when the work performed did not meet the criteria proscribed in the project plans or governmental regulations. In other cases, there appears to be no listing in the permit log for approvals and in some cases the permit date matches noting in permit log and signatures are illegible. Despite city officials knowing and recognizing that the documents they were processing were signed by nonexistent employees, the documents were fully processed and filed as complete. The city’s response to questions about these discrepancies was that they were a “glitch.”
In certain cases, the city charged fees for traffic lights and freeway entrances in another city. The city in some cases charged sewer fees when the property utilized a septic system or railroad crossing fees when there was no railroad crossing near the location.
A city cannot process or make a ministerial approval of a development nor can it sign off on a septic system that lies in a water-provision jurisdiction other than itself which also provides water for the jurisdiction’s fire hydrants. Physical “will serve” letters are required in such instances. Properties in California Division of Forestry and Fire Protection very high fire danger zones require other procedures and analysis prior to the issuance of a building permit. The California Plumbing Code prohibits the issuance of a building permit if a septic system or expansion cannot be installed. Septic systems have setback requirements and cannot be in or near drainage courses. Septic systems cannot be placed in easements per San Bernardino County Code.
One case in point of the City of Redlands’ failure to enforce the full range of development and land use standards with regard to an accessory dwelling unit project taking place within the city is one such application and undertaking on a property at 12747 Hilltop Drive.
Redlands, like 21 of San Bernardino County’s 23 cities and incorporated towns, has a generally comprehensive sewer system. Like a few of those municipalities, however, there are spots within the city limits where the sewer system does not extend due to topography or previous annexation, and those properties entail septic systems. In order for an accessory dwelling unit located in an area where the city’s sewer system extends to be fully approved and certified for occupancy upon the completion of construction, the granny flat must either be tied into the city’s sewer/wastewater treatment system, which requires a separate connection and hook-up fee and operation fee arrangement than that of the preexisting residence. In order for an accessory dwelling unit located in an area where the city’s sewer system does not extend to be fully approved and certified for occupancy upon the completion of construction, the granny flat must be connected to the  onsite wastewater treatment system – generally known as a septic system or cesspool – already in place for the dwelling unit on the parcel on which the accessory dwelling unit is to be located. This generally means that the septic system or cesspool be enlarged to accommodate the increase in effluent it will have to accommodate. Each site must have 100 percent expansion room.
In 202, Redlands adopted its own local agency management plan fro onsite wastewater treatment systems. Septic systems, sometimes referred to as onsite wastewater treatment systems, have other restrictions, including setbacks and requirements for expansion areas.
Regulations require that septic systems be located in an area which can be accessed from above, serviced from the front and have proper setbacks from structures and drainage courses. This practically means that the septic system in whole or part cannot underlie the foundation of a structure, a driveway, a sidewalk, a street or any other impermeable cover placed over the ground beneath which the system is located nor interfere with the drainage course for the property.
Another requirement is that plans for a construction project must be submitted prior to construction being initiated, that the plans show a structure that is in compliance with all state and local standards, that the plans are signed off on by responsible and licensed inspectors before the construction begins and. Importantly, that what is actually constructed is in compliance with the submitted plans, as well as that the construction is inspected at progressive junctures to ensure it has been completed in compliance with applicable standards.
A host of construction standards that apply to residential dwelling units and accessory dwelling units alike pertain to the foundations, the plumbing systems, electrical systems, fire code compliance in the construction/construction materials and external improvements such as retaining walls on the properties. Structures must be constructed on soil that has been compacted to a degree that will support the weight to be imposed on it.
The septic system expansion at 12747 Hilltop Drive does not correspond with what was represented in the plot plan for the expansion of the septic system, as the expanded septic system extends into the drainage course and intrudes into the setback area.
The septic system as it now exists constitutes a code violation, due to it extending into the middle of the drainage course as well as beneath the driveway and the original structure. Given that the contour and slope of the property and grading for the project rendered such a code violation unavoidable, the permit should not have been issued.
The accessory dwelling unit is constructed on fill dirt, held in place by a retaining wall, the stability of which is untested and unverified, given that city records indicate no inspection was done on the wall or its foundation, meaning from the footer to top before the final grading was performed. In addition, there are outstanding questions as to the actual height of the wall in locations as some places appear to be over the 6-foot city standard.
There was no engineered design for the retaining wall. Both the ownership contract for the property and the site’s rural residential agricultural zoning limit grading and the addition of fill dirt. In this case, a massive amount of fill dirt was used to redress the slope on the property, which put the project out of compliance.
Furthermore, setbacks – i.e., a specified minimal distance of any structure and septic system from structures, trees, drainage courses and the property line – that are otherwise the standard in that particular zone or neighborhood must be maintained.
The accessory dwelling unit, at 1,200 square feet, occupies a substantial portion of the yard and is sited on a property with what was originally very steep terrain in a very high fire risk zone. This puts the accessory dwelling unit very close to the preexisting home on the property, as well into space that is reserved for the property’s setback zone, thus obstructing the defensive space around the original home and increasing the neighborhood fire risk, which is exacerbated by the consideration that Hilltop Drive is a cul-de-sac. As a consequence, other homeowners in the neighborhood have lost their homeowners insurance.
In the case of 12747 Hilltop Drive, a city employee has acknowledged that what has actually been constructed as part of the accessory dwelling unit is inconsistent with the plan submitted to the city to obtain approval of the application for the involved improvements.
The city-generated permit chronologies for the accessory dwelling unit, the construction of the retaining wall and the installation of a new septic system, including the addition of a 1,000 gallon tank at 12747 Hilltop Drive, list a series of milestones achieved in the application and planning process, from the granting of the grading permit on November 15, 2024, the issuance of a permit to construct a retaining wall on December 2, 2024, the issuance of a permit to construct a 1,200 square foot structure on December 19, 2024 and the issuance of a permit to install a new septic system on March 25, 2025.
Those milestones include the original application, paying of fees, deposits, plan checks, route plan filings, inspections and the issuance of grading, construction and occupancy permits.
Of note is that city documentation shows that on March 14, 2024 and March 28, 2024, Chris Jensen signed off on a fire safety review and a plan check for fire safety, respectively. Jensen was the Redlands Fire Department’s fire marshal from 2020 until 2022, but left Redlands to become the fire marshal and a division chief in Rialto in 2022. He thus was not available to undertake the review and plan check in 2024 as he is credited with on the city’s official document.
Similarly, on March 14, 2024, July 8, 2024 and August 7 Andrew Carothers is credited with having done pre-construction reviews of the plans for the accessory dwelling unit, which included, a correction to a building review, another correction to a building review and comments with regard to a building review, respectively. Carothers began with the City of Redlands as a plans examiner in Redlands in April of 2016 and remained in that assignment until April of 2020, at which point he promoted to the city’s chief building official. In February 2022, however, he left Redlands to become the senior plans examiner with the City of Riverside.
There is thus a discrepancy with regard to whether those reviews of the planning documents for the accessory dwelling unit project at 12747 Hilltop Drive actually took place as city documents attest.

Defying spirited calls that it carry out a competitive bid for which company would get the privilege of running the El Prado Golf Course going forward, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday , April 29 voted to perpetuate the county’s sublease of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with the golf course’s current operator for the next 22 years.

In 1975, the county entered into a sublease of roughly 314.21 acres with a consortium of medical and dental professionals, El Prado Golf Course Management, LLC, led by Leo Kenneth Heuler, DDS, who undertook to develop the property as two 18-hole golf courses, situated around the intersection of Euclid and Pine Avenue. In 1976, Prado Regional Park opened, a major component of which was the first of the 18-hole golf courses that had been completed by the consortium of doctors who had leased the property. Subsequently, the second 18-hole course was completed, and both have remained continuously open to the public for 44 years, with the exception of days when the courses were flooded. From 1999 until 2000, the original participants in the El Prado Golf Course Management, LLC made a gradual handoff of the golfing operations at El Prado to another generation of medical professionals, who were headed by Heuler’s son, Walter Heuler. In 2014, El Prado Golf Course Management, LLC undertook talks with the county about exercising an option to renew the sublease for another 40 years, but the county, contemplating potential future options for the property that went beyond utilizing it as a golf course, renewed the sublease for five years only.

By 2019, Walter Heuler was 70 years old and both he and virtually all of his partners in the Prado golf courses venture, several of whom lived outside California, had lost the enthusiasm for the golf operation. The county was leaning toward revamping its master plan for El Prado Regional Park, which was to include the addition of an entertainment/concert venue, special sports event/tournament centers, perhaps to feature a soccer complex that would entail up to 24 soccer fields and water park amenities. To accommodate these there was talk of dispensing with one or even both of the golf courses. Upon the expiration of the lease on August 31, 2020, no action to renew it had been taken and instead, a month-to-month perpetuation of the golfing operation went into effect and remained in place over the next six months while discussions between the county and Heuler proceeded. Ultimately, on March 9, 2021, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors approved a five-year sublease extension backdated to September 1, 2020 and running through to August 31, 2025. At that point, employees of the El Prado golf facilities, including the operations manager, head golf professional, director of golf, the golf shop manager, café manager, marketing director and head groundskeeper, approached Heuler about assuming ownership and control over the golf operations at El Prado Regional Park from him and his fellow investors.
In the same timeframe, a local attorney, Frank Lizarraga, whose brother worked as part of the grounds-keeping crew at the El Prado courses, came in to represent the facility employees in their takeover bid.

Penultimately, Lizarraga, learning there was dissatisfaction on the part of the county with regard to the condition of the golf course and its facilities and a determination on the part of the county, if the golfing use at the park was to be perpetuated and a sublease on a long-term basis was to be entered into, that new arrangement should be made with a different subleasing entity that would be more diligent about maintaining the golfing facilities and country club than El Prado Golf Course Management, LLC had.

With the advantage of knowing…

Journalism, bred from the sire Curlin and the dam Mopitism by the Don Alberto Corporation and trained by Michael W. McCarthy, is favored by nearly three-quarters of the handicappers going into tomorrow’s Kentucky Derby. When Journalism moves onto the track at Churchill Downs, he will be at the end of a four-win streak or on the verge of a five-win streak. Arguably the finest colt in the race, his strongest competitors on paper are Citizen Bull, trained by Bob Baffert, and Sandman, a product of a consortium that includes D.J. Stable LLC, St. Elias Stable, West Point Thoroughbreds, and CJ Stables trained by Mark Casse.
Sandman, starting from the 17th position and with pre-race day odds of 6-to-1, is a slow starter but a strong closer, giving him and his Jockey, Jose Ortiz, a realistic shot at the crown if Ortiz can stay within three to four horses of the lead with a clear open lane coming up on the clubhouse turn.
Baffert’s Citizen Bull, drew the rail, the worst starting position, meaning the man atop him, Jockey Martin Garcia, will need to start like lightning and maneuver outward without interference to get his mount out of a situation in which he is breathing in way too much dust throughout the speed contest. If Garcia can accomplish that Herculean task, the pre-race day odds of 20-to-1 become meaningless and this horse, in the Sentinel’s view, becomes the horse to beat.
Sovereignty, trained by Bill Mott and ridden by Junior Alvarado, at 5-to-1 odds, has garnered some talk as has Luxor Cafe, at 15-1.
With Umberto Rispoli aboard, Journalism, starting in the 8th position, remains the favorite, with pre-race day odds of 3-to-1.

FBN 20250003383
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
JEZZY’S MINI PANCAKES 8265 REDWOOD AVE FONTANA, CA 92335: FARIDE RAMIREZ
Business Mailing Address: 8265 REDWOOD AVE FONTANA, CA 92335
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: April 1, 2025.
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ FARIDE RAMIREZ, Owner
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/07/2025
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy J6733
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on April 11, 18 & 25 and May 2, 2025.

FBN 20250003420
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
BEST WESTERN PLUS ONTARIO AIRPORT & CONVENTION CENTER 209 N VINEYARD AVE ONTARIO, CA 91764: BW VINEYARD LLC 209 N VINEYARD AVE ONTARIO, CA 91764
Business Mailing Address: 439 W MANCHESTER BLVD INGLEWOOD, CA 90301
The business is conducted by: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY registered with the State of California under the number B20250020249.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: April 1, 2025.
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ JAY A DESAI, CEO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/07/2025
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy K4616
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on April 11, 18 & 25 and May 2, 2025.

FBN 20250001982
The following entity is doing business primarily in San Bernardino County as
PEACE BY PIECE THERAPY 10808 FOOTHILL BLVD STE 160 #581 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730: TREMENDEZ SOLUTIONS INC.10808 FOOTHILL BLVD STE 160 #581 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
Business Mailing Address: 10808 FOOTHILL BLVD STE 160 #581 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION registered with the State of California under the number 5946274.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: October 21, 2024.
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130). I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
/s/ ADRIANA MENDEZ, CEO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 02/26/2025
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy J7527
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on April 11, 18 & 25 and May 2, 2025.

Continue reading →

The compelling circumstantial case against Justin Halstenberg which prosecutors over the previous two weeks had so assiduously constructed in their effort to convince an eight-man four-woman jury that he had deliberately touched off the fourth largest fire in San Bernardino County History this week suffered a shattering setback with the convergence of three equally compelling indications that key items of evidence being presented against him had been planted, altered or substituted.
Ironically, the revelation of the problematic issues undermining the prosecution came during the testimony of Shira Johnson, a crime scene specialist and evidence technician with the San Bernardino county Sheriff’s Department whose testimony was to a considerable degree intended to assure the jury that the sheriff’s department and the other agencies it works with in carrying out investigations abide by strict forensic and preservation standards to ensure the integrity of evidence and the manner in which it is collected and cataloged during the investigative process, utilizing proven and time-tested means of establishing an unbreakable and fully documented chain of custody to prevent evidence from being tampered with, altered or compromised.
During her testimony, Johnson inadvertently illustrated that no matter how conscientious she was in facilitating the straightforward and unbiased processing of evidence entrusted to her, including its preservation and scientific evaluation, she was at the mercy of others, whose conscientiousness, competence and integrity might not match her own.
In the first two weeks of the trial, San Bernardino County deputy district attorney’s Justin Crocker and Andrew Peppler using multiple witnesses and the presentation of more than 90 exhibits sought and essentially succeeded to establish that the Line Fire was touched off in a field of dry vegetation just a few feet of the roadway along a stretch of Baseline Road in east Highland at 5:45 p.m.  on September 5, 2024; that two other grass fires had been lit the same day at locations on Bacon Lane and Baseline Road within relatively short distances from where the Line Fire originated at 4:11 p.m. and 4:26 p.m., though they failed to spread; that video footage from residences, vehicles and the Highland Fire Department’s Fire Station located on Baseline Road show that Halstenberg’s distinctive 4-door short-bed white Chevrolet Silverado truck was in the area proximate to where those fires started at the times just prior to, while and after they were sparked; that fire and arson investigators with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection had examined objects – coins, blue-lined yellow paper, a heavy duty industrial staple – found at the locations where the two fires that preceded the Line Fire on September 5 and the Line Fire originated were components of a makeshift incendiary device used to start those fires; that two of those components – coins and blue-lined yellow paper – were found in Halstenberg’s truck when he was arrested on suspicion of being the Line Fire arsonist on September 10, 2024; that there were hundreds of heavy duty industrial staples in a tool chest in a backyard workshop at Halstenberg’s residence in Norco; that a license plate reader at the San Manuel Casino in Highland and multiple security videos at that gaming establishment place him there from 12:04 in the early afternoon until 1:34 p.m.; that T-Mobile cell phone service records show Halstenberg appears to have been in Highland from around noon until the mid-afternoon and in Highland from around 6:30 that evening until late that night; that Halstenberg’s phone was powered off at 3:26 p.m. until 6:44 p.m., a crucial three hour-and-18 minute gap during which all three fires in Highland were lit, a ploy prosecutors suggest was a deliberate attempt by Halstenberg to thwart any investigation into his involvement in starting those fires; security camera video footage of Halstenberg’s truck as it drives around the parking lot at the San Manuel Village in Highland, a vantage point from which the glowing fire in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountain’s could be seen; details with regard to the investigation into three fires that took place in the Jurupa Valley/Rubidoux area of Riverside County in the summer of 2023, one investigated by California Division of Forestry and Fire Protection arson investigators who were not involved in the Line Fire investigation, which involved incendiary devices fashioned from Marlboro cigarette boxes filled with paper towels and coins.
Crocker and Peppler have hinted that trace DNA found on at least some of those incendiary devices in Riverside County matched Halstenberg, and that evidence will be presented to the jury prior to the prosecution resting its case.
Crocker and Peppler were further purposed to, and did this week on Tuesday, present evidence, consisting of a video/audio recording of Halstenberg’s interrogation on the afternoon of his arrest on September 10 in which he denied, until being confronted with photographic and other evidence to the contrary, that he was in Highland on September 5 and then admitted only that he had gone to the San Manuel Casino and that he had then returned home to Norco and had not driven around Highland. This week, a photograph taken on September 10, 202,4 after his pick-up had been impounded, showing what appeared to be a plastic pail in the bed of his pickup truck in which a Marlboro cigarette box had been discarded was shown to the jury.
During his interrogation, when asked by the investigators about the Line Fire, Halstenberg feigned disinterest in it, but said he had heard about it, conflating it with a fire in Lake Elsinore. At that point, during the presentation of the video recording of the interrogation on Tuesday, Crocker suspended the playing of the video to present to the jury evidence extrapolated from Halstenberg’s cellphone that at least 14 times between late in the evening on September 5 and September 9, he had used the Google search engine on his phone to look up media reports from CBS, NBC, ABC, the San Bernardino Sun, the Sacramento Bee, The Fresno Bee, Fox News, Yahoo News and Calfire’s informational page on the Line Fire.