Trucking Company Avoids Prosecution

Saying that no one got caught on tape with his pants down, the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office has decided against filing criminal charges in connection with a hidden-camera-in-the-bathroom controversy.

That decision by authorities Monday concluded an investigation that began in September at a Mira Loma terminal operated by Consolidated Freightways, one of the nation’s biggest trucking companies. Sheriff’s deputies, acting on an employee tip, discovered video surveillance cameras in two men’s lavatories at the 600-employee facility.

But the district attorney’s office said the since-halted secret videotaping, although illegal, did not warrant criminal prosecution. Authorities accepted the company’s explanation that it conducted the surveillance solely to try to stop the use and sale of illegal drugs behind restroom doors.

On top of that, authorities said the video cameras were aimed away from urinals and toilets, and that no one was videotaped “using those facilities or in any state of undress.”

In addition, authorities said the taping was authorized by two middle-management employees and did not involve senior officials of the Menlo Park-based company.

“I’m satisfied that there were no ulterior motives in the use of the video, other than to try to stop the drug trafficking and use,” said E. Michael Soccio, the supervising deputy district attorney who was in charge of the case.

Soccio said the company’s apparent goal of keeping truckers from driving while under the influence of drugs was “a good intent, but the means they were using to stop drug use and sales at their facility was unlawful. The real decision we had to make as an office is, ‘Do you prosecute that kind of conduct criminally, or do you make sure the conduct has stopped and allow the civil process to resolve the question of damages?’ ”

In fact, at least three civil suits have already been filed on behalf of employees and others who used the bathrooms, including family members and salespeople who call on the company.

A lawyer in Santa Ana representing employees and other plaintiffs in one of the suits, William O. Humphreys, expressed disappointment with the district attorney’s decision not to file charges.

He called the company’s videotaping an “outrageous” invasion of privacy. Humphreys added that if the company was, in fact, trying to combat a drug problem, it could have resorted to other, less intrusive, measures that affected both employees and nonemployees who use the restrooms.

Consolidated Freightways spokesman Michael Brown lauded the district attorney office’s decision, saying, “The conclusions that invasions of privacy were minimized and that the attempt was intended to halt significant drug abuse and sales are correct conclusions.”

“The district attorney,” he said, “recognizes the safety sensitivity of the business.”