A San Francisco Superior Court Judge on Thursday found sufficient evidence to hold former Mission District leader Jon Jacobo to answer to sexual assault charges following a preliminary hearing.
Jacobo is charged with three felony counts related to alleged incidents of rape, non-consentual oral sex and sexual battery, as well as a domestic-violence charge that was reduced to a misdemeanor.
Both Jacobo’s defense attorney, Martina Avalos, and Elisha Jussen-Cooke, an attorney for multiple women alleging Jacobo of sexual misconduct, said afterward that they felt the outcome was positive.
Jacobo, who is currently detained on house arrest, appeared in court wearing a blue suit, clear-framed glasses, brown leather shoes, and an Apple watch. His hair was slicked back, his beard trimmed. When he wasn’t standing with family in the hallway, holding his baby, he sat next to his attorney, resting his chin on his hands and tapping his fingers.
Today’s ruling by Judge A. Marisa Chun was “an important step toward holding Jacobo accountable for the violence and the crimes that he has perpetrated against multiple victims,” Jussen-Cooke said, noting how difficult it was for survivors to come forward. Jussen-Cooke is a victim’s rights attorney at the Cooperative Restraining Order Clinic, and works separately from the deputy district attorneys who appeared in court on Thursday. They declined to give a statement.
Defense attorney Avalos, for her part, said she walked away feeling “invigorated” and hopeful that “the truth will come out” about the “narrative” constructed against her client. A preliminary hearing, she pointed out, requires the prosecution to meet a lower evidentiary standard than a trial.
The prosecution called one witness: Sergeant Esther Gonzales, who, with the San Francisco Police Department Sexual Offender Unit, investigated the accusations Sasha Perigo made against Jacobo in 2021. Most of her testimony regarded what Perigo told her in an interview after the alleged rape in April 2021.
Jacobo’s defense team hoped to subpoena Perigo, but prosecutors asked the court to block those plans. Judge Chun granted the prosecution’s motion, a decision Avalos ardently objected to. She argued that there were contradictions between Perigo’s interview and her public statements about the alleged assault, questions the sergeant would be unable to answer on her behalf.
It “boils down to an issue of credibility,” Avalos told the court. Perigo’s credibility, she added, must be “assessed first hand by the court.”
The court allowed Gonzales, an officer with seven years of experience working with victims, to provide testimony on Perigo’s behalf, for the time being. This is permitted under Proposition 115, which seeks to protect victims and witnesses in criminal cases.
In response to Avalos’ argument that Perigo had been permitted to make statements through her lawyer without question in the media, Judge Chun said the remedy would not be to call in the victim during a preliminary hearing.
Gonzales, who sat at the witness stand with her arm propped up in a post-surgery sling, recalled the details of her interview with Perigo.
Perigo, she was told, met Jacobo because they were both affordable-housing advocates. During the pandemic, Gonzales said, they began to privately message via Instagram and text. DMs turned into “sexting” with nude photographs, Gonzales continued. Both exchanged numerous heart-eye emojis, evident in a 25-minute long video of hundreds of messages that was shown briefly to the court before being entered into evidence by the prosecution.
According to Perigo’s interview with Gonzales, she and Jacobo had consensual sex in the back seat of her car on Halloween of 2020. Perigo says it didn’t happen again. Instead, she told Gonzales that on Feb. 16, 2021, she set a “boundary” to be friends.
The three incidents of sexual assault Jacobo has been charged with allegedly occurred on April 3, 2021 when Perigo, according to her interview, spent the night in Jacobo’s bed. During this time, Gonzales said, Perigo repeatedly refused Jacobo and had “never really felt that much force before.” The next morning, Perigo thought, “Oh my God, I was just raped,” the officer today told the judge. Perigo went to get a rape kit.
During their 2021 interview, Perigo told Gonzales she did not leave Jacobo’s bed because she was tired, that she had “disassociated,” and that she suffered from PTSD. She did not call 911; Perigo, in past statements, has been vocal about not trusting police and not wanting to participate in the criminal justice system. Perigo subsequently changed her mind when multiple other women also accused Jacobo of misconduct.
Jacobo’s attorney took issue with what she described as Gonzales’ “woefully imprecise” investigation, in which she was not “grilling for truthfulness.”
Throughout her cross examination, Avalos dwelled on details Gonzales did not ask Perigo about: The edibles that Perigo “maybe” consumed the day of the incident? How she felt Jacobo’s penis on her body if she was fully clothed?
Avalos also pointed out incidents when Perigo had reached out to Jacobo. She asked why Perigo did not have visible bruises. She questioned why part of Perigo’s text messages to friends had been redacted.
“I asked for everything, and she gave me what she wanted to give me,” Gonzales said.
In response to Avalos’ questions, Gonzales acknowledged that, in her experience, it was “unusual” for a victim to use legal terms like “assualt” and “rape,” or to have so much information about their case in the media.
The courtroom was visibly divided on Thursday. Behind prosecutors Melissa Demetral and Katherine Wells sat about 20 women, mostly advocates and volunteers from victims’ rights organizations.
“I think it’s important just to show up for survivors,” said one of the women in attendance.
Behind Avalos were a few Latina community members and Jacobo’s family.
His other supporters, Jacobo’s attorney later said, were “working-class people who couldn’t take the day off” and were prevented from coming to court by “class and cultural differences.”
Various outcomes could prevent Jacobo’s case from going to trial. There could be a motion to dismiss the charges, or Jacobo could take a plea deal. But this, Avalos said, won’t happen, “because he’s innocent.”
He will be arraigned again on March 6.
let’s recap: he sent and received nudes from various women, he abused multiple women, he was known to be violent and aggressive, he brought a woman over raped her in Gabriela’s own bed and own home, many of these incidents while he was with Gabriela, and she thought, let’s have a baby?
I know he never wanted a baby. but you gotta clear your name somehow right?
A proud father my ass. but cute prop I guess. pretty responsible to have a baby in the middle of this mess to try to save your narcissist ass.
I think at this point she’s actively complicit. And she’s pretty foolish about it, given that she’s posted pictures to her Instagram of him violating his parole.
‘Class and cultural differences’ … I thought diversity was our strength, not our excuse?
So many people knew about this and continued to party with him and post photos as if proximity to him was some sort of achievement. His baby’s mother is going to Stanford for a PhD – how can she be so stupid? Matt Haney travelled with him.
Probably reasonable to presume Jacobo’s defense will be able to interject into the public sphere a greater degree of skepticism than currently exists. And it’s not going to be pretty if it goes to trial, which seems likely since he’s got a decent shot at acquittal. Tough road.
Grim and awful. Trial will be horrible for all concerned parties, especially the women. Here’s hoping that a public trial will put an end to Nancy Tung & Co’s gross attempt at weaponizing (and retraumatizing) the survivors by assembling a new DCCC “sexual violence task farce” with only men on it…..and not a single woman of color. Not holding my breath though.