3621 W MacArthur Blvd Suite 107 Santa Ana, CA 92704
Toll Free – (844)-500-1351 Local – (714)-604-1416 Fax – (714)-907-1115

OC prosecutors can proceed with case against man accused of igniting massive Holy fire

Rent Computer Hardware You Need, When You Need It

A judge has denied a defense request to remove the Orange County District Attorney’s Office from prosecuting the man accused of igniting the extensive 2018 Holy fire, determining there is no evidence that the agency’s top lawyer made comments jeopardizing the right to a fair trial.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Patrick H. Donahue’s decision, announced during a hearing on Wednesday, March 22, in a Santa Ana courtroom, clears the way for an upcoming jury trial for Forrest Clark, who is charged with intentionally starting a blaze that began in Holy Jim Canyon, near Trabuco Canyon and in the Cleveland National Forest, and destroyed 23,000 acres in Orange and Riverside counties and a dozen cabins.

Donahue acknowledged that Todd Spitzer, during his successful 2018 campaign to head the DA’s Office, referred to Clark as a “monster” and said he believed Clark should be considered for the death penalty rather than life without the possibility of parole, the maximum sentence he currently faces. But the judge added that he found no evidence Spitzer has done anything improper in the case.

“Mr. Spitzer has never made a (courtroom) appearance in this case,” the judge said. “He hasn’t made any comments since being sworn in as DA. There is nothing to show there is a conflict in this matter.”

The defense attorney had said Spitzer committed himself to a position on an open case, and could have dissuaded investigators from pursuing a different suspect.

The motion to recuse was opposed by the DA’s Office and the state Department of Justice, the agency that would have most likely inherited the Clark case had local prosecutors been taken off of it. Attorneys with both agencies argued there was no evidence that the Spitzer’s comments had led to any conflict in the case.

The case against Clark — as outlined in testimony during a 2018 preliminary hearing — relies heavily on threats Clark was accused of making against his fellow canyon residents, as well as Clark telling an investigator who asked if he caused the blaze, “No, but maybe.”

Related Articles

Crime and Public Safety |


Man convicted of second-degree murder in Garden Grove hotel shooting

Crime and Public Safety |


Donald Trump’s potential indictment caps decades of legal scrutiny

Crime and Public Safety |


Man was insane when killing father on Laguna Niguel trail, judge says

Crime and Public Safety |


Federal judge blocks key parts of California handgun law

Crime and Public Safety |


Driver in Santa Ana crash gets 2 years in prison after pleading guilty to vehicular manslaughter

Generated by Feedzy