Q&A: How massacre at Seal Beach hair salon led to an unprecedented jailhouse scandal

It started with a massacre at a hair salon near the Seal Beach Pier and morphed into one of the biggest law enforcement scandals in Orange County history.

Here’s a breakdown of the jail informant scandal from the pages of The Times.

What is this scandal about?

The use of informants was first exposed in the prosecution of Scott Dekraai, who killed eight people, including his ex-wife, in the Seal Beach mass shooting.

On Oct. 12, 2011, Dekraai walked into the Salon Meritage and opened fire, killing his ex-wife, Michelle Fournier, 48, along with salon owner Randy Fannin, 62; Lucia Kondas, 65; Michele Fast, 47; Victoria Buzzo, 54; Laura Elody, 46; Christy Wilson, 47; and David Caouette, 64, who was shot outside in his car.

Dekraai pleaded guilty to eight counts of first-degree murder in 2014. His punishment remains unresolved; he will receive either a death sentence or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Prosecutors presented evidence that Dekraai made incriminating statements to the informant. A judge later disqualified the district attorney’s office from the case, saying it failed to disclose evidence about the prolific serial informant. Secret jailhouse computer logs revealed he had been part of a scheme run with jailers to place informants near suspects.

Prosecutors and jailers said that in this case it was a coincidence, but Dekraai’s attorney insisted it was part of an operation to elicit incriminating remarks from defendants who were represented by lawyers — a violation of their rights under federal law.

At least four serious criminal cases — including two murder cases — have already suffered serious setbacks because of questions over informant involvement.

Asst. Public Defender Scott Sanders, Dekraai’s attorney, said that during the last five years there were at least 41 cases in which informants were questionably used, and his office is looking further back.

What has been the fallout from the scandal?

Both the district attorney’s office and Orange County Sheriff’s Department have come under scrutiny for the way informants are used.

Earlier this year, a panel unveiled a highly critical report saying a “failure of leadership” at the Orange County district attorney’s office led to the scandal.

The findings, presented by legal experts on a special committee established by Dist. Atty. Tony Rackauckas, described the office as functioning “as a ship without a rudder” and faulted some of its prosecutors for adopting a “win-at-all-costs mentality.”

The committee called on the office to improve oversight of cases and promote prosecutors who place justice ahead of legal victories.

Hasn’t the use of jailhouse informants been a problem elsewhere?

Yes. In Los Angeles County, a scandal more than two decades ago involving jailhouse informants pushed the county to adopt tough policies restricting their use. Now, prosecutors must obtain permission from a committee before using a jailhouse informant as a witness. Other counties have been reluctant to adopt similar policies, experts say.

What’s the latest on the case?

Several weeks ago, an appeals court panel affirmed Goethals’ decision to toss Orange County prosecutors off a mass-shooting case for their failure to give the defense evidence related to jailhouse informants.

The California attorney general’s office appealed Goethals’ decision, placing the blame for the withheld evidence on the Sheriff’s Department.

But the three-judge panel for the 4th District Court of Appeal blasted that contention as “nonsense” and found that Goethals acted within his authority.

The appeals court found there was “overwhelming evidence” to support Goethals’ conclusion that two jailers — Seth Tunstall and Ben Garcia — had lied or willfully withheld evidence in court about informant records.

How about the families of the victims of the Seal Beach massacre?

At a news conference last weekend, family members of victims called on the California attorney general’s office to accept the convicted killer’s guilty plea in exchange for a punishment of life in prison without the possibility of parole, hoping to expedite a case that has languished for years.

“We are exhausted from this continuous pain, and this has got to be over with,” said Paul Wilson, whose wife, Christy Wilson, was killed as she worked in the salon. “Life will never be the same for us, but we should have the chance to move on and heal.”

Wilson sharply criticized Rackauckas for “recklessness” that he said has further delayed the process and accused him of “revictimizing” the families.

After Hattie Stretz, the sole survivor of the shooting, read prepared remarks calling on the state attorney general to accept the lesser punishment of life in prison, one of the victims’ daughters interjected from the row of family members behind her.

“We’re not all united in that, still,” said Chelsea Huff, daughter of Dekraai’s slain ex-wife, Michelle Fournier. Huff said several of her family members don’t agree with the idea of dropping the death penalty and that she had not been made aware of the statement or the news conference until the Orange County district attorney’s office called her about it.

“I want it to be over, but as a family we need to stick together,” said Butch Fournier, Michelle’s brother. “We still believe in the death penalty. We don’t want him to have that last bit of control, that last bit of what he wants.”

richard.winton@latimes.com | Twitter: @lacrimes

christine.maiduc@latimes.com | Twitter: @cmaiduc

shelby.grad@latimes.com | Twitter: @shelbygrad

ALSO

A tale of two droughts in California: Wetter in the north, still bone dry in the south

P-39 mountain lion, mother of three kittens, killed by car on 118 Freeway near Chatsworth

Ex-L.A. County sheriff knew about a scheme to obstruct an FBI probe and helped plan part of it, reporter testifies