the Bureaucracythe Bureaucracy

Criminal charges against 'gastankgate' defendant dropped

This article was originally published in the the Amador Ledger Dispatch on March 12, 2000, and is reproduced here with its permission.

DA says he'll file civil case

By Joanna Baker
Staff Writer

JACKSON—There were only two empty seats in Department Two of Amador County Superior Court on Friday morning when Deputy Attorney General G. Lynn Thorpe requested that all criminal charges against Mark Sherrill in the Womack gas tank case, be dismissed. Thorpe is a member of the District Attorney's prosecution team and, according to District Attorney Todd Riebe, has provided legal advise and counsel to Riebe on the "gastankgate" case.

In a press release, Riebe said, "Recently, we made Mr. Sherrill what we believed to be a very reasonable offer to resolve his case. Unfortunately, he rejected it. Today we have dismissed the criminal charges pending against Mr. Sherrill, however, the Attorney General will be filing a civil action against him in Sacramento within the next two weeks."

Riebe told the Ledger Dispatch that the offer made to Sherrill required "merely and agreement to abide by environmental laws in the future and to pay a small fine." When asked if this offer required Sherrill to admit culpability, Riebe said that his office had "made it clear that they were open to negotiation" on this.

Sherrill is reported to have spent $22,000 on his defense in this case. He stated after court that the dismissal came "far too late" for him.

Sherrill's attorney, Reid Roberts, pondered the effect of Friday's decision on conspiracy charges against Womack. "One of my primary concerns was to get rid of the conspiracy charges," he said. "I don't know what this case does to Mr. Womack's case. You can't have a one-man conspiracy."

Roberts said that he was planning to file a motion to dismiss the charges against his client because they were not supported by the grand jury evidence. "This motion to dismiss was no unexpected," he said.

Sherrill's wife, Connie, responded to Riebe's press release by saying, "If they think $5,000 is a small fine, I guess we have a serious disagreement. We counter offered and received no response."

Mrs. Sherrill went on to say, "If the evidence presented to the grand jury supported their case against Mark, why did they drop it. I think the bottom line is that they don't want another law suit filed against the county." Mrs. Sherrill summarized Sherrill's defense. "Mark was hired for truck rental for the weekend. That's all," she said.

In another motion, Thorpe requested that Judge John F. Cruikshank issue a stay-away order, requiring Robert W. Womack to keep away from members of the Grand Jury that indicted Womack and Sherrill.

Thorpe said that a grand jury member had been approached by Womack who asked why she had voted to indict, accused her of causing him trouble, and asked if she still lived in the same house.

Addressing his response to Womack, Judge Cruikshank said, "Don't cause me any trouble now. Just stay away from grand jury members, just for me. I'm getting older."

The grand jury member in question, in an interview with the Ledger Dispatch, said that Womack did approach her as she was going out the door of Café Max and asked her if she had a minute. She stated that he then made the remarks cited in court. She said she was not easily intimidated, but she found this encounter disturbing.

She said she told Womack, "I was just doing my job. I didn't want to be on the grand jury, but they chose me. You've got to do your job, even if it is your best friend they are investigating."

To the Ledger Dispatch she stated, "This is not fair. It should not happen to anyone."

The Womack case is scheduled to be back in court on Friday, May 12, at 9 a.m., when it is hoped that the Third District Appellate Court will have rendered a decision on whether to overturn Judge Cruikshank's decision to suppress evidence collected by the D.A. in a search of Womack's property.

Copyright © 2000 Amador Ledger Dispatch


| Masthead | E-mail, Postal,  Phone and Fax Contact Information |
Unless otherwise noted, this site and its contents are copyright © 2000 Peter K. Sheerin

Revised: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 03:27 PM -0700