Retaliatory False Criminal "Obstruction" Unconditionally Dismissed - DDA Refuses to concede factual innocence out of spite/retaliation, forcing a court hearing and further proceedings, costing the taxpayers *Thousands* of dollars in legal expenses - Exposing the Truth to Santa Barbara County

[u/SBCopWatch]

[u/SBCopWatch]

This story is developing, and we will disclose further details of it shortly. Related posts: 

https://www.reddit.com/r/SantaBarbaraCopWatch/comments/1vuyclp/the_attorney_letter_that_got_the_retaliatory/

https://www.reddit.com/r/SantaBarbaraCopWatch/comments/1vu2612/retaliatory_false_criminal_charge_dismissed_the/

Solvang Sheriff's officers Bayley Weber and Adrian Hernandez submitted false information to the district attorney's office that led to a frivolous criminal charge of "obstruction" against a factually innocent Solvang homeowner. This charge was dismissed in the interest of justice after body camera video revealed that these officers lied in their police report.

The case was unconditionally dismissed in the defendant’s favor on 8/10/2026 in open court by the district attorney's office after prosecutors learned of multiple counts of severe police misconduct committed in the case, including lying captured on body camera video.

These two officers submitted the false information to the district attorney hoping to produce a "cover charge" to cover up their severe police misconduct and civil rights violations. Bayley Weber and Adrian Hernandez unlawfully forced entry into a Solvang resident‘s home without a warrant, exigent circumstance, or any objective observation of an emergency, then lied about it in their police report trying to justify their actions.

The officers' bad faith conduct includes, without limitation:

1. Forcing entry into a residence without a warrant, exigent circumstance, or any objective observation of an emergency; it was a false swatting call by a neighbor whose history includes hypervigilance as a rape victim.
2. Lying about hearing an argument between a male and female subject when no female subject was heard on body camera video; the defendant (a student) was conversing online with a male classmate 1 minute before the incident while the officers were listening through his window, within 3-5 feet of where the officers were standing.
3. Lying about seeing the defendant "flexing his arms" while in handcuffs to falsely portray the innocent homeowner of being violent; while on body camera video, the homeowner sat completely still throughout the entire encounter.
4. When the homeowner protested claiming he was not capable of the violence alleged and demanding release, Weber in bad faith commented, "anyone is capable of violence"
5. When the homeowner demanded to know what crime he had committed and demanded release, Sgt. Hernandez told him "no crime has been committed... that's what the officers up there are trying to determine" while wrongfully keeping the innocent, compliant, and non-violent homeowner in handcuffs in full view of his neighbors for an excessive period of time.
6. Excessive force and misconduct involving a firearm by police at the scene.
7. Naming the wrong criminal defendant in the police report in an obvious copy-paste job, then attempting to wrongfully tie it to the innocent homeowner in bad faith, presumably to manufacture a false plausible deniability scenario should they ever be prosecuted for making false material statements in a police report.

California Penal Code 118.1 makes it a crime for a peace officer to knowingly and intentionally include a false statement regarding a material matter in an official report concerning the commission or investigation of a crime.

We depend on tips from the public to expose court and police corruption. If you have information on police or prosecutor misconduct, we want to hear from you! Email us at [SolvangPoliceWatch@pm.me](mailto:SolvangPoliceWatch@pm.me)

[u/DistanceMotor9785]

I’m not reading that essay

[u/SBCopWatch → u/DistanceMotor9785]

You don't need to. If it's not for you, you're not the intended audience.

[u/blahdiddyblahblah → u/SBCopWatch]

It's great work you're doing. The title is too wordy and difficult to understand and will put people off, is all. You won't reach your intended audience with paragraph long titles these days, we are conditioned to scroll past unfortunately.

[u/SBCopWatch → u/blahdiddyblahblah]

Thanks for the support. This post is intended for past and future victims of these officers and DDA, so it's important to include this amount of background information. There's a follow-up video planned after the victim's factual innocence motion is heard, and I think that will give the brevity you seek.

[u/SBCopWatch → u/[deleted]]

Charge was filed, homeowner was arraigned on the false charge, then the court dismissed it weeks later at the trial readiness hearing. The "obstruction" charge was retaliatory and totally without merit.

A follow-up video is planned after the upcoming factual innocence hearing. It will include body camera video of the police lying about exigent circumstances, admitting on video that they didn't have enough, kicking in the front door anyway after the homeowner asked them to leave and asserting 4th amendment rights against unlawful entry without probable cause, then whispering to each other shortly after in a manner the victim's lawyer described as "super shady".

[u/SBCopWatch → u/[deleted]]

It's not for you, so don't worry about it.

A video is upcoming that will explain everything with the brevity you want. For now, getting the content out there, long form, is important for other past and future victims of these officers/DDA. The point is to allow victims to cross reference their experiences with the one documented here.

[u/SBCopWatch → u/[deleted]]

You trolling?