No Value: C.F. vs. Martinez

On May 31, 2019 a No Value was filed involving a dispute between C.F., E.F., S.F., and Alternative Family Services, Inc., County Of Sonoma, Martinez, Mark Zapata, Martinez, Martha, State Of California, for 23: Unlimited Other PI/PD/WD in the District Court of Sonoma County.

Preview
1 Daniel R. Friedenthal, Esq. – State Bar Number 136847
Michael G. Rix, Esq. – State Bar Number 233653
2 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
1520 W. Colorado Boulevard, Second Floor
3
Pasadena, California 91105
4 Telephone: (626) 628-2800
Facsimile: (626) 628-2828
5 Email: dfriedenthal@fhblawyers.com
mrix@fhblawyers.com
6
Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE FAMILY SERVICES
7

8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA
10

11 C.F. by and through her Guardian and Case No.: SCV264540
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; [Assigned to Patrick M. Broderick; Dept. “16”]
12 E.F. by and through her Guardian and
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR; DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE
13 S.F. by and through his Guardian and NUMBER SEVEN TO EXCLUDE
Guardian Ad Litem SOLOMON FARR, IMPROPER SPECULATION AND
14 CONJECTURE BY PLAINTIFFS’
Plaintiffs, EXPERT, ELIZABETH L. JEGLIC;
15
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
16 AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
17 v.
18

20 MARK ZAPATA MARTINEZ; MARTHA
MARTINEZ; ALTERNATIVE FAMILY
21 SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1 - 30,
Action Filed: 5/31/19
22
Defendants. Trial Date 9/15/23
23

24 Defendant, Alternative Family Services, hereby moves the court in limine, for
25 an order precluding plaintiffs’ expert, Elizabeth L. Jeglic, Ph.D., from attempting to
26 introduce any evidence at trial based upon improper speculation and conjecture.
27

28
1
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
1 This motion is made upon the grounds that plaintiffs’ expert is relying upon

2 inappropriate matter to form her opinions and should be precluded from giving those

3 opinions pursuant to Evidence Code section 803.

4 This Motion in Limine is based on this Notice, the attached Memorandum of

5 Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Daniel R. Friedenthal, the papers and

6 records on file in this action, and upon such oral argument as may be presented at the

7 hearing on the Motion.

9 DATED: September 18, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
10

11
By Daniel R. Friedenthal .
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ.
JAY D. BROWN, ESQ.
12 Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE
13 FAMILY SERVICES

28
2
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

2 I. INTRODUCTION
3 This is an action for alleged sexual assault and abuse brought on behalf of
4 three minor siblings: Emma Farr (E.F.), Solomon Farr, Jr. (S.F.) and Charm Farr
5 (C.F.). Plaintiffs were respectively three, six and seven years of age when they were
6 allegedly abused in 2018 by Mark Zapata Martinez while placed in the foster home of
7 former defendants, Mark Zapata Martinez and Martha Martinez.
8 Plaintiffs designated Elizabeth L. Jeglic, Ph.D., as an expert in this matter. As
9 a part of her report, Dr. Jeglic incorporated a table purporting to show “cost estimates
10 of child maltreatment.” The table provide estimates for such things as “childhood
11 healthcare,” “adult medical,” “productivity,” “criminal justice,” and “quality-adjusted life
12 years.” The table supplied figures for cost in 2010 dollars and 2018 dollars. (See,
13 report attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”)
14 The “cost estimates of child maltreatment” are in no way specific to the
15 plaintiffs in this action. It is entirely speculative to determine what the “adult medical”
16 costs of child who was maltreated would be as opposed to any other individual.
17 “Productivity” and “quality-adjusted life years” are so vague as to be meaningless.
18 Any testimony based upon this table of cost estimates must be based solely upon
19 speculation and conjecture and must be excluded at trial.
20

21 II. EXPERT TESTIMONY BASED UPON SPECULATION AND CONJECTURE
22 IS IMPROPER AND SHOULD BE EXCLUDED AT TRIAL
23 Evidence Code Section 801(b) states that an expert's opinion must be based
24 on matters “perceived by or personally known to the witness or made known to him at
25 or before the hearing.” Evidence Code section 803 provides: “The court may, and
26 upon objection shall, exclude testimony in the form of an opinion that is based in
27 whole or in significant part on matter that is not a proper basis for such an opinion.”
28
3
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
1 An expert may not base his or her opinion on speculation or conjecture. (Hyatt

2 v. Sierra Boat Co. (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 325, 338.) In In re Lockheed Litig. Cases

3 (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 558, 564, the court stated:

4 An expert opinion has no value if its basis is unsound.
(Citations omitted.) Matter that provides a reasonable basis for
5 one opinion does not necessarily provide a reasonable basis
for another opinion. Evidence Code section 801, subdivision
6
(b), states that a court must determine whether the matter that
7 the expert relies on is of a type that an expert reasonably can
rely on “in forming an opinion upon the subject to which his
8 testimony relates.” (Italics added.) We construe this to mean
that the matter relied on must provide a reasonable basis for
9 the particular opinion offered, and that an expert opinion
10 based on speculation or conjecture is inadmissible.

11 Where an expert must work backward to reconstruct an accident, his opinion is

12 inadmissible if based upon too many variables. (Solis v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit

13 Dist. (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 382, 389–390.) “The value of opinion evidence rests not

14 in the conclusion reached but in the factors considered and the reasoning employed.

15 (Citations omitted.) Where an expert bases his conclusion upon assumptions which

16 are not supported by the record, upon matters which are not reasonably relied upon

17 by other experts, or upon factors which are speculative, remote or conjectural, then his

18 conclusion has no evidentiary value. In those circumstances the expert's opinion

19 cannot rise to the dignity of substantial evidence.” (Pacific Gas & Electric. Co. v.

20 Zuckerman (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 1113, 1135.)

21 The “cost estimates of child maltreatment” produced by Dr. Jeglic in her report

22 consists of nothing except variables. Dr. Jeglic did not examine each, individual

23 plaintiff, none of whom were older than seven at the time of the alleged incident, and

24 one of whom was three, to determine how each category of the purported table

25 applied to the specific plaintiff. Instead, figures for “adult medical” are simply pulled

26 out of thin air with no explanation as to why the subject “estimate” would apply to

27 maltreated children, but not to children who were not maltreated. The same applies to

28 “productivity” and “quality of life.”

4
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
1 The jury should not be allowed to accept as an “expert” opinion regarding the

2 amount of future damages plaintiffs might suffer based upon such obviously
3 speculative and conjectural material.

4 Pursuant to the foregoing, defendant requests that the court grant this motion in

5 limine.

6
DATED: September 18, 2023 FRIEDENTHAL, HEFFERNAN & BROWN, LLP
7

8 By: Daniel R. Friedenthal
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL, ESQ.
9 MICHAEL G. RIX, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendant, ALTERNATIVE
10
FAMILY SERVICES
11

28
5
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
1 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
2 Daniel R. Friedenthal declares:

3 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in California and a partner of the

4 firm of Friedenthal, Heffernan & Brown, attorneys of record for defendant, Alternative

5 Family Services.

6 2. A copy of the report prepared by plaintiffs’ expert, Elizabeth L. Jeglic,

7 Ph.D., is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

8 If called as a witness I could and would competently testify under oath to the

9 above facts which are personally known to me.

10 Executed on September 15, 2023, at Pasadena, California.

11 I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California that the

12 foregoing is true and correct.

13 ___________________________
DANIEL R. FRIEDENTHAL
14

28
6
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NUMBER SEVEN TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ANY
EVIDENCE OF ALLEGED ABUSE OF ISRAEL FARR
EXHIBIT A
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 1

Expert Witness Report
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D.

CF by and through her Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem Solomon Farr; EF by and through her Guardian
and Guardian Ad Litem Solomon Farr; SF by and through his Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem Solomon
Farr v. Mark Zapata Martinez; Martha Martinez; Alternative Family Services, INC; and Does 1-30
___________________________________________________________________________________

Overview and Purpose:

This report has been prepared at the request of Abbey, Weitzenberg, Warren & Emery P.C. law firm who
represent the plaintiffs CF by and through her guardian and guardian ad litem Solomon Farr; EF by and
through her guardian and guardian ad litem Solomon Farr; SF by and through his guardian and guardian
ad litem Solomon Farr in the above-captioned matter. I have been asked to render my professional
opinion on items I-IV below. All my opinions are rendered within a reasonable degree of certainty and
are based upon the materials reviewed as listed below, my expertise as a sexual violence prevention
researcher, and research conducted in the field of sexual abuse prevention and the long term
consequences of childhood sexual abuse. Full details of my qualifications and experience entitling me to
give expert opinion are listed in my curriculum vitae – see Appendix 1. I reserve the right to amend this
report should additional evidence become available.

Materials Reviewed in Formulating my Opinions:

1) Plaintiffs’ Summons and Complaint
2) Plaintiff and Defendants’ Discovery
3) Deposition of Jay Berlin
4) Deposition of Marta Martinez and exhibits
5) Deposition of Leslie Melson and exhibits
6) Deposition of Craig Barton and exhibits
7) Deposition of Lisa Van Zantwyk and exhibits
8) Deposition of Samuel Cruz and exhibits
9) Deposition of CF
10) Deposition of EF
11) Deposition of SF
12) Deposition of Solomon Farr
13) Criminal Records of Mark Martinez
14) Mandated Reporter Agreements for Mark and Martha Martinez
15) AFS Self Study Documents for Martha and Mark Martinez
16) SAFE Desk Guide
17) AFS Home Visit and Inspection Reports
18) Notice of Decertification of Martinez home and Letter of Decertification
19) Special Incident/Injury Report
20) Complaint Investigation Report from the State of California
21) AFS Files for CF, EF and SF
22) Draft IME of CF, EF and SF by Dr. Harvey A. Lerchin
23) Child Psychiatric Evaluations of CF, EF and SF by Dr. Lynn Ponton
24) Expert Report of Siliva Pizzini
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 2

25) Expert Report of Tim Turner
26) My research and expertise in the area of sexual offending behavior, sexual victimization, sexual
violence prevention and consequences of child sexual abuse.
27) Research and reports in the field of sexual offending, sexual grooming, and sexual violence
prevention.

Professional Opinions and Basis for those Opinions:

I. Children in out of home care, such as foster care, are a very vulnerable population and consequently
are at increased risk for child sexual abuse (CSA):

1. Children in out-of-home care such as foster care and residential care are a particularly
vulnerable to CSA and studies have found high levels of CSA in children who experienced
out-of-home care1234.
2. Children who are vulnerable are at increased risk for child sexual abuse5. Vulnerable child
victim characteristics include the absence of one or both parents6 7, lower income
households or other family stressors8 9
3. Recently, a study examining red flag sexual grooming behaviors identified several victim
characteristics that differentiated adults who reported experiencing CSA and those that did
not. In particular, a lack of supervision or parents who were not resources for the child were
identified to occur more frequently (5.5 and 3.75 times, respectively) among those
experiencing CSA as compared to those who did not experience CSA10 .
4. African-American/Black children are at particular risk for CSA11 , and are nearly twice as
likely as White children to be targeted for CSA12 thus making them a particularly vulnerable
population.

1 Benedict M. I., Zuravin S., Brandt D., Abbey H. (1994). Types and frequency of child maltreatment by family foster-care providers in an urban-
population. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18, 577–585
2 Rosenthal J. A., Motz J. K., Edmonson D. A., Groze V. (1991). A descriptive study of abuse and neglect in out-of-home-placement. Child Abuse

& Neglect, 15, 249–260.
3 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2010). Sexual victimization in juvenile facilities reported by

youth, 2008-09. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf
4
Euser, S., Alink, L. R. A., Tharner, A., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2014). The Prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse in
Out-of-Home Care: A Comparison Between Abuse in Residential and in Foster Care. Child Maltreatment, 18(4), 221–231. https://doi-
org.ez.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/10.1177/1077559513489848
5 Seto, M. C. (2019). The motivation-facilitation model of sexual offending. Sexual Abuse, 31(1), 3-24
6 Finkelhor: D.; Hotaling, G.T., Lewis, LA., & Smith, C. (1989). Sexual abuse in a national survey of adult men and women: Prevalence,

characteristics, and risk factors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 14, 19-28.
7 Finkelhor. D., & Baron, L. (1986). High-risk children. In D. Finkelhor et al. (Eds.), Sourcebook on child sexual abuse. (pp. 60-88). Beverly Hills,

CA: Sage.
8 Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R., Turner, H., & Hamby, S. L. (2005). The victimization of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child

maltreatment, 10(1), 5-25.
9 Winters, G. M., Jeglic, E. L., & Kaylor, L. E. (2020). Validation of the sexual grooming model of child sexual abusers. Journal of Child Sexual

Abuse, 29(7), 855-875.
10
Jeglic, E.L., Winters, G.M. & Johnson, B.N. (2023). Identification of red flag child sexual grooming behaviors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105998
11
Luken, A., Nair, R., & Fix, R. L. (2021). On Racial Disparities in Child Abuse Reports: Exploratory Mapping the 2018 NCANDS. Child
maltreatment, 26(3), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775595211001926
12 Sedlak, A. J., Mettenburg, J., Basena, M., Petta, I., McPherson, K., Greene, A., and Spencer, L. (2010). Fourth national incidence study of child

abuse and neglect (NIS–4): Report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 3

5. Children in foster care are often isolated from family and friends, and young children may
not be able to have access to phones. Isolation from guardians is a risk factor for CSA and is
reported 20 times more frequently in cases of CSA compared to those who are not abused13.
6. As African American/Black children who had been removed from their home/parents due to
neglect/lack of supervision and who were now in foster care, CF, EF and SF were particularly
vulnerable to CSA. Additionally, they were isolated from their parents and had no access to
telephones and minimal ability to communicate with their primary foster care parent,
Martha Martinez due to language barriers (they spoke only English and she spoke primarily
Spanish) further increasing their risk for CSA.

II. Organizations that oversee the care of vulnerable children such as AFS have a responsibility to have
strict policies and procedures in place and adhere to those policies and procedures in order to protect
these vulnerable children from child sexual abuse (CSA):

1. The CDC’s 2007 report entitled Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving
Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures highlight six key components and
corresponding recommendations (summarized in Table 1) for child abuse prevention for
youth-serving organizations including:

1. Screening and selecting employees and volunteers
2. Guidelines on interactions between individuals
3. Monitoring behavior
4. Ensuring safe environments
5. Responding to inappropriate behavior, breaches in policy, and allegations and
suspicions of child sexual abuse
6. Training about child sexual abuse prevention

2. While the CDC14 states that not all their guidelines have to be strictly adhered to and “not all
strategies presented in this document will apply to all organizations”, they also state “it is
very important that organizations abide by their youth protection policies and procedures
to avoid being criticized for not adhering to them if a youth is sexually abused.”

3. Enforcement of sexual abuse prevention policies was particularly important for AFS as they
serve a very vulnerable population (see Opinion I above).

13
Jeglic, E.L., Winters, G.M. & Johnson, B.N. (2023). Identification of red flag child sexual grooming behaviors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105998
14 Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.

Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 4

Table 1: CDC’s Six Key Components and Corresponding Strategy Recommendations

Component Strategy Recommendations

Screening and Selecting Employees and • A review of the organizational code of
Volunteers conduct and ethics
• A thorough background check including
criminal records (should encompass
arrests, charges, and convictions)
• A search of the internet including social
media
• Calling all previous employers and verify
dates of employment which should
correspond to those listed on the resume
and reasons for leaving.

Guidelines for Interactions Between Individuals • Having at least two adults present at all
times when working with youth (i.e. no
one-on-one interactions)
• Guidelines for physical contact [i.e. no
hugs; physical contact only as required
for safety such as spotting in gymnastics
or to correct form (body placement)]
• A zero-tolerance policy for sexual
comments or jokes
• Prohibiting contact with minors outside
of institutional-related events (i.e. do not
drive minors home in personal vehicles,
take minors out for meals, or non-
organization related excursions)
• Recognizing that youth can abuse other
youth, so having policies where certain
high-risk activities or areas such as
changing rooms have two adults present
during times when youth are changing

Monitoring Behavior • Establish behavioral policies and make a
list of behaviors that are and are not
permitted
• Develop policies on how to handle
boundary violations
• Document all instances of boundary
violations
• Determine which boundary violations will
result in immediate terminations and
which ones can be remediated
• Establish clear reporting and
accountability chains.
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 5

• Yearly evaluations where issues related
to sexual violence prevention are
evaluated and discussed
• Regular unscheduled observation of
employees/volunteers working with
youth
Ensuring Safe Environments • Clear lines of sight
• Bright lights
• Video cameras or security in areas that
may be hidden from view
• Locked closets and storerooms
• Windows in all doors
• Open-door policies
• The use and monitoring of video cameras

Responding to Inappropriate Behavior, Breaches • Collaborating with a lawyer regarding
in Policy, and Allegations and Suspicions of Child reporting policies
Sexual Abuse • Identifying who within the organization is
a mandated child abuse reporter
• Defining the continuum of appropriate,
inappropriate, and harmful behaviors
• Defining which violations will be handled
internally and which ones require
contacting the authorities
• Developing confidentiality and
community/press notification policies
when an accusation of child sexual abuse
is made and/or confirmed
• Having a policy about what to do
regarding the employment of
staff/volunteers who are accused of
sexual abuse while the accusation is
being investigated
• Having clear documentation of all reports
and investigation proceedings and results

Training About Child Sexual Abuse Prevention • General information about child sexual
abuse, including a discussion of sexual
grooming and warning signs
• Organizational policies and procedures
for child sexual abuse prevention
• How to handle disclosures of sexual
abuse and reporting
• Definitions of appropriate and
inappropriate conduct and behaviors
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 6

III. AFS’s failure to adhere to their own policies and established guidelines for preventing CSA within
institutions that supervise youth, enabled Mark Martinez to gain access to, and sexually abuse CF,
EF, and SF while these vulnerable children were under their care.

1. AFS did not adequately adhere to their own screening policies for assessing CSA risk for
selecting Mark and Marta Martinez as resource parents.
a. According to the CDC15, organizations serving youth must “develop consistent and
systematic policies and processes for screening and selection” and in particular those
who will have more autonomy with children, such as foster care parents, should be
“rigorously screen(ed)”.
b. Key areas of screening as described below were omitted in the Home Study Report of
Marta and Mark Martinez and were not followed up by employees of AFS.
c. As part of the Home Study Report, Mark and Martha Martinez were required to
complete the Structured Analysis Family Evaluation (SAFE) which comprised multiple
questionnaires (Questionnaire I and Questionnaire II). Mark and Martha Martinez
omitted multiple key questions pertaining to child sexual abuse risk16 including history
of sexual abuse victimization and perpetration, criminal history, substance abuse history
and criminal history were left blank by Mark and Martha Martinez and these questions
were not followed up with in the Home Study Report.
d. Mark Martinez also noted numerous areas of problems in the home in Questionnaire
Including discipline of children, money, personal habits, household chores, work, sexual
relations, leisure time and time together which were not followed up upon in the Family
Home Study and could be risk factors for CSA17.
e. As this key information was omitted from the Home Study Report it was not possible to
adequately screen for CSA risk of Mark and Marta Martinez.

2. AFS did not adequately adhere to standard reference check policies for youth serving
organizations when onboarding Martha and Mark Martinez as Resource Parents.
a. The CDC18 recommends that as part of a comprehensive screening and selection process
to prevent sexual violence, youth serving organizations should conduct criminal
background checks as well oral reference/employment/volunteer history checks to “
provide additional information about applicants and help verify previous work and
volunteer history”.
b. The CDC19 also recommends the following with regard to reference checks:
“ To provide a more complete picture of the applicant, the references should come from
a variety of sources and should not be limited to family members or friends.”

15 Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.
Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
16 https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/riskprotectivefactors.html
17
Ibid
18 Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.

“Obtain verbal—not just written—references for applicants. Conversations can elicit
much more information than written responses. • Match references with employment
and volunteer history. Is anyone important missing from the references, such as the
supervisor from the applicant’s most recent job?”
c. Of the three references obtained by AFS, two were Martha and Mark Martinez’
biological children who may not be able to evaluate them objectively (Alma Zapata
Hernandez and Leticia Martinez), and the third was their previous social worker
(Alexandra Jacobs) who had not had regular contact with Martha and Mark Martinez in
a professional capacity for multiple years. Thus none of the references could objectively
speak to their professional history in the years immediately preceding the placement of
the Farr children in their home.
d. Contrary to the guidance of the CDC, only one of the three references were contacted
by telephone (daughter Leticia Martinez), the other two references just completed
standard templates largely comprised of check boxes and as such follow-up questions
were not asked.
e. Since the professional reference, Alexandra Jacobs, had not worked with Mark Martinez
since his accident, she was not able to speak to his behavior change following his work
accident that was reported by Martha Martinez in her deposition.

3. AFS failed to adequately provide supervision to CF, EF and SF while they were in the Martinez
home.
a. As part of monitoring behavior and ensuring safe environments for children,
organizations that provide care for children should have regular unscheduled
observation of employees/volunteers working with youth.20
b. The case record of Martha and Mark Martinez does not reflect that AFS engaged in any
unscheduled visits or observations.
c. Given that both Martha and Mark Martinez were providing care to CF, EF and SF, home
visits should have included both Martha and Mark Martinez. In five of the 11 visits,
Mark Martinez was not present or not on the phone and thus the case worker was not
able to observe his behavior around the children. Further, given their isolation and
vulnerability, it should have been a priority to meet with the children individually
without their foster parents present. This only happened on two occasions (three for
CF).

4. AFS failed to recognize and provide guidance on boundaries for red flag sexual grooming
behaviors in the Martinez household:
a. According to the CDC “Employees/volunteers should learn about healthy youth
development so they can (1) promote positive development in the areas of self-confidence,
independence, and social interactivity and (2) understand and be aware of risk behaviors in
which youth may engage” Youth organizations should “teach employees/volunteers about
healthy youth development and when certain behaviors are appropriate; Educate

20Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.
Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 8

employees/volunteers about sexual development and how to distinguish between healthy
and inappropriate or harmful behaviors when monitoring interactions”.
b. Guidelines for physical contact [i.e. no hugs; physical contact only as required for safety]21
should be delineated.
c. According to a recent research study examining red flag sexual grooming behaviors, non-
sexual sexual contact such as sitting on a lap is reported 8 times more by those who
experienced CSA than those who did not in non-family situations22.
d. According to her deposition, Mrs. Martinez reported to an AFS worker that the children
were hugging Mr. Martinez, sitting on his lap and saying they loved him and calling him
daddy within days of being placed within the Martinez home. Such behaviors are not only
red flags for CSA but also developmentally inappropriate and not indicative of healthy youth
development. These behaviors were not investigated by AFS.

5. AFS Failed to Properly Respond to Breaches in Policy following the CSA of CF, EF and SF.
a. According to the CDC23, following a confirmed incident of CSA the following internal
procedures should take place in order to prevent future instances of abuse:
• develop a system to track allegations and suspicions of child sexual abuse cases.
• Include child sexual abuse as a category on general incident reporting forms for
significant physical injuries. These forms should be completed by employees/volunteers
who first learn of the abuse through hearing an allegation or making an observation.
• Review the general incident reporting forms. This step should be carried out by the
supervisor of the employee/ volunteer.
• Refer child sexual abuse reports to a higher-level individual, preferably a trained internal
or hired investigator, for the purpose of reviewing your organization’s procedures. This
individual should do an incident review after each allegation to determine what went
wrong and how a similar scenario can be prevented in the future. For example, was a
policy or a step in a policy not followed? How can policies be modified to prevent
another occurrence?
• Record the resolutions of child sexual abuse cases.
b. Following the CSA of CF, EF and SF by Mark Martinez while in the care of AFS, it is unclear
what actions took place to analyze the organization’s procedures. Only a 2-page Special
incident/injury report and a 6 page Complaint Investigation Report from the State of
California were provided that provided few details on the incidents.
c. According to the deposition of AFS CEO Jay Berlin he was not involved in the investigation of
the CSA. He was unaware whether there were errors that led to the abuse or whether any
policy changes were enacted or needed to be implemented following the abuse of CF, EF
and SF.

21 Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.
Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
22
Jeglic, E.L., Winters, G.M. & Johnson, B.N. (2023). Identification of red flag child sexual grooming behaviors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105998
23
Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.
Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 9

6. AFS Failed to Provide Martha and Mark Martinez with Adequate Training in Child Abuse
Prevention.
a. The goal of CSA prevention training in youth serving organizations is “to give people
information and skills to help them prevent and respond to child sexual abuse.”
b. In her deposition Martha Martinez indicated that while she did talk about sexual
violence prevention training in her group she did not remember what was discussed
as they learned about so many things.
c. There was no mechanism in place to ensure that Martha and Mark Martinez were
aware of key areas of CSA prevention such as organizational policies and procedures,
child sexual abuse information, the importance of preventing child sexual abuse,
personal conduct, healthy development of youth, protective factors, handling
disclosures, and mandated reporter guidelines.
d. AFS policies and procedures regarding CSA prevention were described in the Resource
Parent Manual, however this manual was not provided to Martha and Mark Martinez
as required.

7. AFS failed to create an organizational culture where CSA prevention was a top priority of the
organization.

a. According to the CDC24, “It is vital that organizations create a culture where child sexual
abuse is discussed, addressed, and prevented”.
b. Organizational policies and procedures need to be underpinned by best practice
guidelines to embed child safe cultures that prevent and address abuse in organizational
settings25.
c. Best practice guidelines recognize the importance of strong leadership; creating
environments where child safe and wellbeing governs staff behaviors; identifying and
mitigating risk; and responding appropriately to all forms of harm.
d. As Chief Executive Officer of AFS, Jay Berlin would be the individual to provide strong
leadership to AFS and create a culture wherein protecting children under their
guardianship from CSA was a top priority for the organization.
e. However, in his deposition, Jay Berlin stated that he was not involved in any follow-up to
the special incident report involving the sexual abuse of CF, EF and SF by Mark Martinez.
Further as noted above there was no internal review done to reassess their policies and
procedures in light of this tragic event. This does not convey a culture where protecting
vulnerable children from CSA was a top priority.

IV. Failure of AFS to adhere to their own policies and standard sexual violence prevention guidelines
and as outlined in Opinion III, enabled Mark Martinez to gain access to and sexually abuse CF, EF

24
Saul J., Audage N.C. (2007). Preventing Child Sexual Abuse Within Youth-serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies and Procedures.
Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/PreventingChildSexualAbuse-a.pdf
25 Australian Human Rights Commission 2018. National Principles for Child Safe Organisations. Australian Government. Sydney.

https://childsafe.humanrights.gov.au/national-principles/about-national-principles
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 10

and SF causing both short- and long-term physical, psychological, psychosocial and socioeconomic
harm to CF, EF and SF.

It is my opinion that because standard child abuse prevention policies as outlined by the CDC, and
their own internal policies, Mark Martinez was able to gain access and sexually abuse CF, EF and SF
causing both short- and long-term physical, psychological, psychosocial and socioeconomic harm.
My opinion is based upon the sexual abuse literature, the research examining the short- and long-
term consequences of sexual abuse, Expert Reports of CF, EF and SF from Dr. Lynn Ponton, and Draft
IME Reports of CF, EF and SF from Dr. Harvey A. Lerchin.

1. As seen in Table 2, the long-term psychological consequences of child sexual abuse (CSA) are
extensively researched and documented and include but are not limited to the following:

a. Depression – although it should be noted that one study found that time from CSA
to the onset of depression was 11.5 years26
b. Male victims of CSA were five times more likely to develop PTSD than those without
CSA27 – one study found the mean time of onset of PTSD following CSA was 8.0
years.
c. Two times more likely to attempt suicide28
d. 1.7 times more likely to experience alcohol dependence.
e. Two times more likely to develop alcohol problems and alcohol abuse.
f. Increased risk of experiencing future sexual violence

Table 2: Psychological Consequences of CSA and Increased Odds that they will be experienced by those
with CSA
Disorder Odds Ratio (how many times more likely)
Conversion Disorder 3.3
Borderline Personality Disorder 2.9
Anxiety 2.7
Depression 2.7
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 2.3
Eating Disorders 2.2
Somatoform Disorders 1.9
Schizophrenia 1.4
Suicide Attempt 2.43-2.65

26Teicher, M. H., Samson, J. A., Polcari, A., & Andersen, S. L. (2009). Length of time between onset of childhood sexual abuse and emergence of
depression in a young adult sample: a retrospective clinical report. The Journal of clinical psychiatry, 70(5), 684–691. https://doi-
org.ez.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/10.4088/jcp.08m04235
27 Molnar, B. E., Buka, S. L., & Kessler, R. C. (2001). Child sexual abuse and subsequent psychopathology: results from the National Comorbidity
Survey. American journal of public health, 91(5), 753.
28 Dube, S. R., Anda, R. F., Whitfield, C. L., Brown, D. W., Felitti, V. J., Dong, M., & Giles, W. H. (2005). Long-term consequences of childhood

sexual abuse by gender of victim. American journal of preventive medicine, 28(5), 430-438.
Elizabeth L. Jeglic Ph.D. 11

2. The long-term physical impact of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) is well documented29. Adults
who experienced CSA were 1.35-2.12 times more likely to report health problems than
adults who did not experience CSA across multiple domains including but not limited to:
a. General overall health
b. Pain
c. Gastrointestinal symptoms
d. Cardiopulmonary symptoms
e. Obesity
f. Lower odds of having health insurance and receiving a general check-up in past
yea

Case Info

Judge

Broderick, Patrick Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

September 18, 2023

Case Filing Date

May 31, 2019

County

Parties

Alternative Family Services, Inc. Defendant
Casheros, Jerry Dmitri Attorney for the Defendant
C.F. Plaintiff
County of Sonoma Defendant
Curley, Arthur Walter Attorney for the Defendant
E.F. Plaintiff
Friedenthal, Daniel Ray Attorney for the Defendant
Hoffman, Brian Lee Attorney for the Defendant
LILLIGREN, MATTHEW R. Attorney for the Defendant
Martinez, Mark Zapata Defendant
MARTINEZ, MARTHA Defendant
Montgomery, Scott Robert Attorney for the Plaintiff
S.F. Plaintiff
Speer, Kymberly Elizabeth Attorney for the Defendant
State of California Defendant
Michael Rix Attorneys for Defendants
Daniel Barer Attorneys for Defendants
Karen Stepanyan Attorneys for Defendants
Johann Hall Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Andrew Chang Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Robert Pittman Attorneys for Defendants
Theodore Somers Attorney
Kaitlyn Wright Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Kevin Nguyen Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Michael Green Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Chris Andrian Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Peter Finn Attorneys for Defendants
Samantha Zutler Attorney
Jenica Hepler Attorney
Nathan Putney Attorney
Jill Ravitch Attorney
Leslie Butori Attorney
Natasha Berg Attorneys for Plaintiffs
David Benton Attorney
Daniel Reardon Attorneys for Defendants
Javier Vaca Attorney
Andrew Chen Attorneys for Plaintiffs

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

No Value: C.F. vs. Martinez

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties