Jury deadlocks in Sonoma Valley stun gun case against ex-deputy

A Sonoma County jury failed to reach a verdict in the case against a former deputy who kicked in a Sonoma Valley man’s bedroom door and shot him with a Taser.|

A mistrial was declared Monday in the Sonoma County felony assault case against a former deputy who kicked in a Sonoma Valley man’s bedroom door and shot him with a Taser, actions caught on body-camera video that led to the deputy’s firing.

Judge Shelly Averill declared the mistrial and dismissed the jury after it returned from three hours of heated deliberations deadlocked 8-4 for not guilty.

While Sonoma County law enforcement officers have been the subject of complaints, Thorne is the first local cop in recent memory to face criminal charges for on-duty actions. He could still face up to three years in jail if prosecutors pursue a new trial and he’s convicted. Prosecutor Bob Waner declined to say Monday whether he would pursue another trial.

Outside the courtroom, Thorne declined to comment about the case.

His attorney Chris Andrian said he was not surprised by the hung jury because of how polarizing law enforcement and excessive-force issues are in the community.

“I think this shows people realize that officers have to handle split-second decisions,” Andrian said.

Sheriff’s Capt. Mark Essick, who testified against Thorne in the case, said his department stands by the assertion that Thorne’s actions do not follow department policies for handling domestic violence incidents or using force.

“We respect the jury had a very difficult situation to look at and we respect the conclusion,” said Essick, who is a candidate in the upcoming election for Sonoma County Sheriff. “But overall it does nothing to change our vision in hindsight that this was not appropriate behavior and we took the right course of action.”

Thorne’s checkered job history was not introduced during the nearly two-week trial, but will play a role in a federal civil rights case against him. Del Valle is claiming Thorne and the two other deputies involved, Beau Zastrow and Anthony Diehm, violated his rights in a case in federal court that was on hold while the criminal trial unfolded. He’s also claiming Sonoma County is responsible for what occurred because those hiring Thorne were aware of his job performance history.

A Press Democrat investigation found Thorne failed to keep jobs in law enforcement before he began work as an unpaid reserve Sonoma County sheriff’s deputy in 2015. His first job in law enforcement as a Richmond police officer ended after 10 months in 2002 while he was the subject of three complaints and a civil rights lawsuit. In 2007, he landed a job as a correctional deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department, but was dismissed a year later, records show.

Thorne was hired fulltime as a Sonoma County sheriff’s deputy in April 2016, four months before his encounter with Del Valle on Sept. 24, 2016.

“He has a history of excessive force,” said Izaak Schwaiger, Del Valle’s attorney in the civil case. “The county was aware of that when they hired him, and they hired him anyway.”

Jurors watched the video of the violent encounter between Thorne and Fernando Del Valle, who was in bed at his Boys Hot Springs home when deputies arrived. Deputies went to the house after a neighbor called 911 reporting a possible domestic disturbance.

The 911 caller suggested Del Valle’s now ex-wife may have been the aggressor in a verbal argument, describing an intoxicated woman yelling at her husband.

Prosecutors said Thorne overreacted, rushing into the home and kicking down the bedroom door without evidence a crime had been committed and before trying to learn what was taking place.

Del Valle testified he feared for his life. He said he had refused to get out of bed at Thorne’s orders because he didn’t believe it was required. After the two briefly argued, Thorne shot him in the bare chest with the stun gun. Del Valle leaped out of bed and headed for the door, with Thorne and another deputy beating him in the back with batons.

But Thorne’s lawyer argued domestic violence incidents are among the most dangerous for law enforcement, and the deputy was following training protocols suitable to the situation given the limited information he had.

The other two deputies at the house were cleared of wrongdoing. Del Valle was initially arrested, but prosecutors refused to file charges against him and instead asked sheriff’s officials to review the body camera recording and consider whether Thorne had acted improperly.

Thorne was fired within weeks of the incident, according to several sources familiar with the investigation. Police privacy laws bar the Sheriff’s Office from confirming the nature of Thorne’s departure from the job.

Essick testified that when he reviewed the body camera footage, he immediately believed Thorne did not follow department policy and appeared to have broken the law, from the way he entered the house to his use of a baton and stun gun on Del Valle.

Interviewed outside the courtroom, the jury forewoman, who declined to provide her name, said she believed Thorne assaulted Del Valle, and found it disturbing to hear arguments suggesting that’s how law enforcement officers are trained to treat people during domestic violence investigations.

Her view was in the minority.

Eight jurors who believed Thorne was not guilty gathered around Thorne to speak with him, dismissed and free to talk about the case. Some shook his hand, including a 53-year-old Windsor man who told Thorne he understood what it meant to have a job requiring split-second decisions. Interviewed later, the juror declined to give his name.

“We all agreed things could have been done differently, that things were not done 100 percent how we may have reacted, but done 100 percent according to his training,” the man said.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.