Twist in Tale of Julian Shoot-Out : Lawyer Claims Survivors Jumped His Gold-Mining Claim

A San Fernando Valley attorney and his business partner, who said Wednesday that they own the mineral rights to federal land outside Julian where a fatal shoot-out occurred between two bands of gold miners, accused the survivors of trespassing on their claim.

“They had no right . . . absolutely no right to be there,” said James Tweedy of Van Nuys during a telephone interview. He was referring to the East County family that was apparently searching for valuable minerals on the land 6 miles east of Julian, a quiet, 19th-Century gold-mining town of 4,200 residents.

Authorities still have only the version of the incident provided by the East County family, whom investigators have refused to identify. The group, according to authorities, arrived on the property Monday to picnic and search for gold. But the family encountered two Julian men--Edward (Joe) John Lopes, 66, and Christopher Mark Zerbe, 34--already on the property. Zerbe had been entrusted to oversee Tweedy’s mining site.

The two groups then argued over who had a legitimate mining claim to the site, authorities said. The dispute later erupted into a gun battle, in which Lopes and Zerbe were killed. No one from the East County family was injured.

“We’ve owned those claims for 25 years,” said Tweedy, who shares the mining rights with Benjamin Haimes of Encino. A spokeswoman for the California office of the federal Bureau of Land Management confirmed that Haimes had 25 claims for land clustered near Julian. All mining claims on public land must be filed with the BLM office.

“We’re concerned about this investigation because Mr. Haimes knew Chris (Zerbe) well,” Tweedy said. “And, secondly, those other people were trespassing.”

In fact, according to Tweedy, Zerbe called Haimes several hours before the fatal shooting Monday and said he had encountered trespassers.

Trying to Blast Site

“Chris told us that he found claim-jumpers on our site and that these people were going to try to blast on our site,” Tweedy said. “We’re just waiting for someone to give us real concrete information.”

But according to San Diego County Sheriff’s Department investigators, the East County family told authorities that they too had a legitimate right to the gold-mining area, known as Horseshoe Bend.

Such contradictions and unanswered questions shroud the bizarre gun-blazing incident that has the sleepy town of Julian abuzz with gossip. Thus far, authorities have had no major breakthroughs in the case.

“We’ll be investigating that aspect (claim right) because it is relevant . . . we will investigate who or who all had a right to be there,” said Lt. John Tenwolde of the Sheriff’s Department. “But pieces of paper, or the lack thereof, don’t justify this violence in any way.”

Members of the East County family told authorities that they had “recently acquired the mineral rights,” Tenwolde said. Authorities have not yet confirmed such information.

Tenwolde said the family’s name is being withheld because the investigation is still in a preliminary stage and that, “although there’s no real reason to believe danger is facing these people, we can’t be sure because we don’t know every thing about the deceased.”

No one has been charged or arrested in connection with the Memorial Day incident, he added.

Finding answers for the case’s many puzzles, including who had legitimate claims to the site, may prove to be a difficult task.

According to officials at the Bureau of Land Management, gold-miners often stake claims on sites that have already been claimed by others.

“It happens all the time,” said Gary White, a spokesman for the BLM’s El Centro office. According to White, a mining applicant need only stake out the property he desires, then notify the bureau of his actions. White said the bureau is not responsible for checking whether the targeted site has previously been claimed; that duty falls with the prospective gold-miner. A dispute between two miners over claims is often settled in civil court.

White added that, even if an individual has sole claim to a site, that person cannot forbid others from roaming the area.

“The land is still federally owned,” White said. “They have no right to exclude other legitimate users of public land. As long as you do not interfere with their mining operations, you’re allowed to go on their site.”