SLOPD detective convinced woman was raped at fraternity party

September 10, 2011

Joseph Trupiano


San Luis Obispo police detective Chad Pfarr said Cal Poly graduate Joseph Trupiano “absolutely” raped a woman at a fraternity party the night of May 7, despite the recent decision by the district attorney’s office not to file charges.

The day following the party, the alleged victim reported to police that she awoke “completely nude and felt severe pain in her vagina and anus,” according to a search warrant filed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department.

While Pfarr would not confirm whether the alleged victim was sodomized, he did say that a physical exam conducted on the woman confirmed everything she reported.

The alleged victim also said she had scratches on her forearms and bruising on her inner thighs, which she did not have prior to the party, according to the warrant.

Following the incident, police arranged and recorded a conversation between the woman and Trupiano. While Trupiano was describing what happened inside a room at the party, the woman interrupted and said she “passed out.”

Trupiano responded, “Yeah”, but then went on to say that she had given him consent.

In addition to the confusion over when the alleged victim passed out, speculation rose over whether or not she had a boyfriend and was making a false rape accusation as an excuse for cheating.

But, Pfarr asserted that she did not have a boyfriend.

“I searched her phone, talked to her friends, her roommates, [and what they said] was confirmed by the information on her phone,” Pfarr said.

On May 12, Trupiano agreed to go to the police department, accompanied by his attorney. When taken into custody, Trupiano did not make a statement to police.

Pfarr viewed his silence as a sign of guilt.

“Usually guilty people are the ones who don’t want to talk to us, from my experience,” Pfarr said.

After three months of investigating, the San Luis Obispo County District Attorney’s office decided not to file charges.


I think that Trupiano and his attorney are considering a law suit against the police department and the detective is covering himself by speaking out. This is not unusual. It will be interesting to see if the SLO Police Department stands behind its detective.


Typoqueen pretty much said the same thing . I guess I’ll leave you with my reply to contemplate.

Pfarr can offer his professional opinion, his conclusion does not invite litigation that can be leveled against him personally or against the SLOPD. What do you think happens when the DA decides to charge a defendant? The entire county knows what the police and DA think the defendant did. Just because the DA decided not to charge the case doesn’t mean Trupiano isn’t guilty. Detective Pfarr can tell us what he believes/knows Trupiano is guilty of all day long. Consider the convicted man who is released from prison after new evidence exonerated him? Think about what the prosecutor usually does. Nine times out of ten, he insists that he convicted the right guy the first time and refuses to reopen the case and look for the guy that really committed the crime, all the while insisting that the exonerated man is, in fact the guilty party! Yup, Pfarr can tell us what he thinks and the “sexual molestor” just has to suck it up.

Trupiano’s attorney offered his opinion in the Tribune and they enjoyed a write up about how Trupiano has been damaged by the allegations (unjustly leveled by this horrible young woman) and the subsequent arrest that ensued. He was rather eloquent in blaming his current tarnished reputation on Pfarr’s decision to arrest him. Pfarr has simply responded and clarified the reasons that the arrest was appropriate and indicated that if it were up to him, Trupiano would still be under arrest.


It could be said that Pfarr is slandering Trupiano. Who is going hire or trust someone that a cop is publicly and even to the press is saying that he’s guilty? I feel that it could be grounds for slander litigation. Even the news media will say ‘alleged’, even during an investigation detectives use the word ‘alleged’. There’s a reason they all say ‘alleged’. Pfarr doesn’t say ‘alleged’, he goes as far as to say ‘absolutely raped’, isn’t that convicting him with out a trial? I still say that he’s setting himself up and perhaps the PD for at least a slander type of lawsuit. I can tell you for a fact that if a cop said publicly that I was guilty of crime that I didn’t commit and that I wasn’t prosecuted for that I would retain a lawyer in a New York minute.


You do have a point here about the word alleged . I wonder if it is used because it’s the PC thing to do or if there is a legal basis behind it? Any Journalist reading this, please chime in, that is a very interesting question.

But still, consider the Ramsey family out in Colorado. The Police Chief outright said they murdered their daughter and he was going to prove it (I have never believed they were guilty). He said it in Colorado and I heard it all the way over here in California! “They were guilty” (per the Chief) and he said it again after the Grand Jury couldn’t make the finding to charge them.

Do you remember the things Marsha Clark said when OJ got off. She has always said that “he was absolutely guilty” and she still say’s it. She even told the blacks (on Nat’l television) that she took notice of the fact that the people reversed affirmative action after the OJ verdict! This stuff can get very nasty between, prosecutors, detectives, cops, victims and citizens who they perceive to have “got away with it”.

Of course maybe Detective Pfarr is actually having a good laugh knowing that to sue him, Trupiano would have to submit to a deposition and take the stand in a civil proceeding! Suing is the last thing that the Trupiano’s want to do. They just want Pfarr to go far far away and stay away from the media!


But, Typo, for Pfarr’s statements to be slanderous, they would have to be “malicious, false, and defamatory.” First, the TRUTH cannot be slanderous. Second, none of what I hear was malicious.


How do you know what Pfarr said was true? If it is false then it is certainly defamatory. If Karen here on CNN wrote a false story stating unlisted (of course using your real name) had definitely raped a defenseless woman would that not be defamatory and slanderous. It would be even worse if it was coming from the PD and then was published in the paper. I have a business and I can tell you that I would think twice about hiring a person that a cop is saying ‘absolutely’ raped a woman.

I don’t want to call this woman a liar as I don’t know all the details but there have been many occasions that for one reason or the other the woman has accused a man of rape when in reality it wasn’t rape.


TYPOQUEEN: “Pfarr doesn’t say ‘alleged’, he goes as far as to say ‘absolutely raped’, isn’t that convicting him with out a trial?


It’s not going to trial. The DA weinered out AGAIN on ANOTHER rape assault at Cal Poly.


So you are saying that it’s okay for someone to slander another in the press without proof? Anyone can get up and say something like ‘John Doe is a pedophile’ and if that causes him to get fired or lose his wife and and family (an example) that there are no repercussions? I’m not an attorney but it seems as if people can’t just slander others like that, especially someone in this detectives position.


Detective Pfarr may be wanting to set the record straight through the media as a way to protect himself. However detectives who had findings different from what the DA wanted to indicate by failing to prosecute. It doesn’t change the bravery it took to speak out like Pfarr did about the rape cases.

I don’t think Brigham has filed a suit against Mason, has he? In the beginning, wasn’t it reported that Brigham was not inclined to file suit against Mason?

At any rate, NO ONE from the SLO SLOFD or the Atasacero PD has spoken out about the kid-glove treatment of their own psycho-first-responders, Mason and Cramer.

So why aren’t those involved in the Cramer and Mason cases spoke out to protect themselves?


“However detectives who had findings different from what the DA”

Mary, Where “findings are concerned”, there is a difference between what the DA believes the investigation has uncovered and what he thinks he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. When the DA was quoted in the press, he stated that his failure to prosecute in no way indicated that the crime didn’t occur. There is no reason to believe that the DA had findings different from the detective. The jury isn’t going to like the victim because of her behavior and the DA doesn’t try cases that he isn’t certain he can win. Also, the city of SLO and our illustrious CP

don’t want the media hype that always follows a case like this and I’m sure that was a consideration for the DA.


Pfarr frequently speaks for the SLOPD/detectives. I’ve not found one case where the SLOPD corrected anything he said.

I just don’t see what the deal is about this. He’s a detective. It may be that the peeps who are referred up to him for investigation or questioning have already been screened by other officers or have, in some way, become a person of interest in the crime.



“You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Do you understand?

Anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand?

You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future. Do you understand?

If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. Do you understand?

If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney. Do you understand?

Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present?


“Usually guilty people are the ones who don’t want to talk to us, from my experience,”

This is why we have a D.A., and the right to be tried by one’s peers. Police officers are usually wonderful people; it’s exceptions like Chad Pfarr that terrify me.

Kevin Rice

You make a conflicted argument. Yes, this is why we have a D.A.; and, it’s also why we have a trial in front of our peers. Neither the D.A. or the police get to pass judgment. Yet, you imply it is ‘terrifying’ if police form an opinion? By extension of your argument, the must D.A. terrify you as well as the D.A.’s job is to come to a conclusion.

Thus, you make no sense.

Truly, the most terrifying circumstance exists when the police and D.A. are in cahoots. Detective Pfarr shines in my book as he is clearly not in cahoots with the D.A. — I can rest easier knowing the police and D.A. are not in lockstep.

This cast also goes beyond Pfarr’s assessment. Details about bruising and such were never revealed elsewhere, and hidden information is problematic–perhaps even terrifying.


It’s not a matter of lockstep it’s matter of policy for legal reasons IMO. I don’t like the idea of cops going all rogue and vigilante on citizens. I agree with Ugluck, IMO it’s scary for a cop to do this publicly. Don’t get me wrong, this has nothing to do with this guy’s innocents or guilt it has to do with a cop that is playing judge and executioner. I say executioner as he could and might have destroyed an innocent man’s reputation.


Out of the three (the DA, the detectives and the officers), the detectives (IMO) have the best shot at making an informed decision/opinon regarding whether it should be prosecuted or not.

The DA is–as we see about once a week in SLOCo–too influenced by politics.

The officers probably would not have access to all of the information developed by the detectives because it is not the officers’ job (usually) to do the investigation and form opinions.

Detectives, including Pfarr, shouldn’t be in cahoots with the DA. The fact that we are so relieved he is not speaks to the corruption at the DA’s office.


I hear you but look at it from the detectives point of view. Seriously, try coming from where he (all investigators) are usually coming from. He obviously empathizes with this victim and cares, he mentioned to the Tribune that this had been a very traumatic, embarrassing and an emotionally devastating experience for her. He said that she was still suffering and would be for a long time to come (or something like that). It was his job to find/identify the person or person’s who harmed her and bring them to justice. He doesn’t want to get the wrong guy, he wants to get the right guy. He wasn’t sitting there thinking, I know it was Trupiano, he would have been thinking that he wanted to find out who did it and Trupiano was suspect number one and needed to be ruled out or in. If it turned out not to be Trupiano, then he probably already had other ideas and trees to shake. I can understand why he thought if Trupiano had nothing to hide then he shouldn’t be afraid to talk and clear the matter up or assist with the investigation. Pfarr knew that he wasn’t out to get Trupiano if he was innocent, the problem is that an innocent person doesn’t necessarily know that, especially if they are compromised, guilty or not, Trupiano was in a compromising situation. He did have sex with the complainant or should I say, sexually assault the complainant. If no one entered the room after he left, then he did brutalize her. It is the injuries that have me calling this a rape, not the fact that she was too drunk to remember.

We have all heard the nightmare stories about how LEO can rush to judgment and mold a crime theory around irrelevant circumstantial evidence. I wouldn’t speak to the police if I were guilty of a crime that I was being investigated for and it’s possible that I might not speak to them if I were innocent. It would really depend on what I could prove to them and what I knew that I couldn’t prove. Under those circumstances, if I thought that I was a prime suspect, I wouldn’t talk to them unless I knew that I had information that they needed. Even then, that’s all I would tell them.

What is the first thing the Attorney say’s after we exercise our rights and elect to consult with our legal council? They say, DON’T TALK TO THEM……

I think Detective Pfarr is an “excellent cop”. I’m glad we have him in SLO. Thank You again for caring and doing such a fine job and for speaking up.


You should be afraid of the first responders who coddle the psycho first responders with whom they work, who sit there meekly and refuse to speak out against what is wrong. They are the ones who support the police/firefighter threat to citizens, like we saw with Cramer and Mason.

Understand, we’ve had two major attacks on citizens by first responders and several rape cases—all but Mason the firefighter’s case have been given a free pass.

I’m glad Pfarr spoke out. He is supposed to have an opinion, after reviewing all evidence. He is a detective who helps develop the case presented to the DA.

In Mason’s case, he certainly didn’t want to talk to detectives–he got a 5-day period from the time he committed the assault to the time SLOPD finally decided to question him, giving Mason lots of time to hide and destroy evidence, get legal advice, etc.

I think the author of this article, Josh Friedman, should do a followup of this article by asking Pfarr if he could provide some backup for his opinion about most people who are guilty don’t want to talk to him.

I mean–outside of the guilty who hang around the detectives, trying to keep tabs on how the crime case is developing–it certainly makes sense that guilt people are not going to want to be questioned by detectives who will be the ones putting the case together for presentation to the DA.


Here is what I posted from a good TT article from 9/8 on this .

“I’ve reminded him that he needs to understand that as the law has dictated, through the district attorney’s actions in this case, he has done nothing wrong,” Carrasco said.

Nothing wrong …. really …. REALLY ! AT BEST , he engaged and continued to have sex with an unconscious girl , I still call it rape . I’d like to also vent that the people that refuse to give statements aided and abetted in the rape and are losers .

Read more:


ASTHECROWPHLIES: ““I’ve reminded him that he needs to understand that as the law has dictated, through the district attorney’s actions in this case, he has done nothing wrong,” Carrasco said.


EXACTLY, thanks for pointing that out.

When the DA decides not to prosecute, it is handing the accused a free pass to say “Well, I wasn’t prosecuted, was I? That means there was no case.”


No doubt, after she passed out is when things got nasty and sodomy was forced upon her. With the sort of injuries she has, she would have been objecting and very verbal about it if she had been conscious because I’m certain that with her type of injuries, it was painful. No doubt that the extreme bruising to her inner thighs was from him holding her in position.


The truth is CCN is a “blog” not a news site and the reporting is always slanted to the writers point of view. Yes its an interesting site and they are able to uncover interesting information as long as it furthers the writers opinion. Just as in this story. When this first broke it was reported that he said she led him to the room and there was questions about when she may have passed out. Which could have been after, and she just didn’t remember. Others have pointed out other things she did that night. I don’t know what happened, I don’t think anybody does because all parties were probably extremely drunk. Yet CCN has convicted him on this blog without giving all the information.


I don’t care what you call it, blog site, news site, muckraking central, we LOVE IT. So what if it does or does not have an agenda. Doesn’t everyone, really?


Finewine, We read in the Tribune that she said, she had a boyfriend and she hoped he didn’t find out about her behavior at the party. It turns out that it wasn’t true, that was something that a frat brother said, that she said, and yet it was printed even when it was proven that she had no boyfriend. The Tribune told us that she was seen throwing herself at all the men, they made her look like she was “looking for it all night”, then they admitted that people weren’t really sure if it was this girl or another girl, but the Tribune still said it anyway. We heard that there was no indication if she passed out prior to, during or after their sexual encounter. The Tribune didn’t mention that after he replied “yeah” to her insistence that she passed out, Trupiano went on to say, that she had given him consent before she passed out. When you finish his sentence, it sort of makes you wonder. It’s sort of “iffy” and it’s up to us readers to decide what we think but we can’t do that with out the added “facts”.

I’m certain that the Tribune would have had the same police reports to refer to that CCN has. The Tribune wrote a slanted story in my opinion and made this girl/victim out to be a liar. Yet the investigator was quite forthcoming when the CCN journalist interviewed him and was of a different opinion than the one that Tribune presented. Please note that the SLOPD investigator who knows more about this case than anyone (other than the rapist) STATED ON THE RECORD that Trupiano did rape her. Her medical evaluation was consistent with rape. She had extreme bruising on her inner thighs and in her rectal area not to mention tearing to her anal cavity which would have been very painful at the time she incurred that “forceful” injury.

The Tribune writes what CalPoly wants them to write, thank you CCN for being fair and adding balance to the slant that the Tribune fed us. You can call CCN a blog if you like but remember that the caliber of reporters here are educated Journalists and Professors – dedicated educators who enjoy “foisting” fair and balanced reporting. CCN has employed 3X Pulitzer Prize Winning Editors to oversee the coverage presented on this site along with LA Times Associates, and published Authors with respected investigative and Journalists credentials. We always get the truth here, like it or not. ;)


“Blog” is that the best you can do? Your website is where?


At least one person wasn’t so drunk that he had the hand-dick coordination to shove his dick into her vagina and anus while she was passed out.


LOL, LOL. You crack me up Mary. I suppose the opposite case could be made, if you get my drift!

Not that I think this is a case, of the opposite case.


Fantastic, this is going to save us some money. We have policemen who are now judge and jury too.

Any police officer who prejudices a potential jury pool like that should be brought up on criminal charges.. I don’t think it should prevent him from serving as a police officer again, but like everyone else, they are not above the law and this was clearly out of line. This is what happens when you let these guys overrun a town, looting the payroll, shaking people down for money at every possible opportunity, and then elect their fearless leader sheriff.

Kevin Rice

Personally, I am pleased that this fine officer is courageous enough to speak in opposition to the D.A. I think it’s more dangerous that you appear to want to silence that.

What’s wrong with a copy having an opinion? Surely they need one before making an arrest! There has never been a prohibition on the police sharing facts of a case; defendants play the press as well. Should defendants be criminally charged with tainting a jury pool as well?

I’m sick of tainted juries. That’s lawyer garbage speak for “we want less informed folk”.

Kevin Rice

“copy” [sic] LOL!! –> “cop”


LOL, I thought you did it on purpose. I knew what you meant , but I did think your sense of humor was a little odd today, regardless it was cute, should of left it.


Suppose all of this evidence were circumstancial, and he is leaving one crucial part of the story out? Let’s say for some reason that crucial part of the story does not get admitted as evidence, on a technicality. Then he’s not going to have a fair trial if you have a community of people who have heard this cop say he’s SURE the guy is guilty.. In fact it’s going to sway them EXTREMELY in favor of prosecuting him because they perceive he’s getting away with something.

I applaud people for speaking out, but you better have facts straight and you better let people have their day in court before you “whistleblow.” And I’m sorry, this is the typical ignorant comment that an officer would make who is not a serious professional whose work you can rely on: “Usually guilty people are the ones who don’t want to talk to us, from my experience,”

Maybe the DA sucks, but there’s got to be a better way of dealing with him.


mkaney, You are aware that the DA has decided not to charge Trupiano, yes? It’s over and there will be no jury, no trial, no verdict other than the debates in the court of public opinion. I’m also pleased that Detective Pfarr spoke up. This poor girl was made to look like a shameless horny bimbo in the press and a liar to boot. Now we know that of the 3 blacked out drunks who cried rape, this young woman was truly a victim, even if she did drink a 5th of jagger at a frat party, she certainly didn’t ask to be brutalized. She deserves a little vindication, she was torn to shreds in the Tribune blogs after the slant that they put on the articles surrounding this “sexual assault”? Thank you for helping her Detective Pharr.

mkaney, we used to get along so well and seemed to agree more often than not, hopefully subjects that are more agreeable to us are on the horizon. :) I miss agreeing with you!


I know Cindy we have not agreed on much lately… I think the recent subjects have been, in my mind, issues of expediency versus principle.. I believe very strongly in upholding rights even if that means a guilty person goes free, and that every person gets equal justice. These seem to be underlying issues with gangs, drug busts, and this incident.

*Especially* with the gangs..I have a friend who has basically devoted his journalistic career to following gang enhancement cases from beginning to end and what he has found is disturbing, and has convinced me that it’s just one more way for police to pad their own pockets and railroad suspects through. There have been some shocking cases up in Yolo County/Sacramento.

You tend to support law enforcement more than I do. Really, every time I peel back the layer on any story associated with law enforcement, I seem to find a plethora of very questionable behavior.


Approximately 1994 or 1995, I was instructing (educational) a teen.

His family owned a local business in an ajacent town where LE would dine.

The young man told me he did not like LE because they stared at him.

I asked him if he was behaving or dressed any different than he does with me, he said no.

He said he is afraid of them, I concluded fear drew their attention.

Oddly a few weeks later in SLO Farmer’s market, they had a BBQ contest where the SLO Chief of Police was one of the judges.

I walked by the stand and noticed off my side vision that someone snap focused at me, it was the Chief of Police at the time.

He kept a hard trailing focued stare at me, it felt weird.

I was dumbfounded and decided to walk up to him and ask him “why are you staring at me like that?”

My wife and child from arear caught up to me as I was turning and walking up to him, she asked me what I was doing and I told her.

She thought I was ridulous and diverted me.

I thought about what could have caused it, and the only think I could think of was being a lone person walking by with my shirt open or unbuttoned.

It was or would be intimidating to anyone.

Thinking back to the teen, I now understand.

LE has a lot of power to stop, detain, and question on suspicion (stretchable) and there is nothing you can do if they get uptight, they can cause and justify roughing you up.

We are caught in the middle between arrogant thugs and arrogant cops.

Two resolve

1. Better selection and training of LE (I will admit I have noticed positive selection/ training improvement in SLO PD)

2. Enhance Conceal weapons permit (with background check and training) to put thugs in risk of tripple jeapordy.

This is a very “mild” example of what I know.

I am (as hard as it for good LE officer) in “NO” disagreement with you.

Many LE techniques are designed to make a subject their own worst ememy but they do not realize that they also are their own worst enemy and we are in the middle of both the criminal thugs and poorly selected cops they claim they need.


Furthermore, what if the guy is innocent and the D.A. is sure that a case would not be beyond a reasonable doubt. Now everyone in the community is going to see him as the rapist version of OJ. It could seriously damage his life. Unless you want the police state to rise, I’d suggest erring on the side of innocent until proven guilty.

Kevin Rice

mkaney, you misunderstand my comment. I am pleased that Pfarr is not in cahoots with the D.A. and is willing to openly disagree. That is a far cry from passing judgment. Yet, previously unrelated additional details about bruising make the case more compelling.

I don’t have enough info to claim the D.A. is wrong. I’m only pleased there is not a clique between the D.A. and Pfarr. If Pfarr is right, isn’t he even more doing the right thing?


I agree it’s good they aren’t in cahoots. But if Pfarr thought something was going on that shouldn’t be, he needs to approach someone in an official capacity. He simply cannot go out in public shooting his mouth off about the case.


Perhaps Pfarr had the blessing of administration.

It would be nice if CCN did a follow-up on this, since it seems to be an issue for some posters.

Kevin Rice

“He simply cannot go out in public shooting his mouth off about the case.”

I’m not certain that he did, are you? Was this an interview or from a written report? On what date? Before or after the D.A.’s decision? Maybe this was from the actual SLOPD report to the D.A.

There’s a lot of assumptions being made that aren’t stated in the CCN story.


Right on slorider . When you make statements about your ” good ” reputation and implied innocents you invite an opposing argument . You are also trying to taint a jury pool . From what I can tell Chad Pfarr is an excellent investigator , it took a lot of courage and conviction to talk to a reporter about this case ( unless this was taken from a police report which is still fine because Pfarr’s thoughts are recorded if fresh eyes look at the case ) .


SLORider, I don’t believe that they are allowed legally to slander someone that hasn’t been convicted. Hey, no one was more guilty than OJ and yet throughout his trial the media used the word ‘alleged murderer’ or something to that effect when referring to OJ.

“Copy” Ha ha ha neener neener neener, I love it when you have typo. Typos can have an ‘affect’ on what people think of you….JK.


I am not surprised at the boy’s arrogance… and why he was so quick to talk… after all, he feels he didn’t do anything wrong. I am sure the young woman was very attractive when she gave her ‘consent.’ Reminds me of the advice he should have listened to from the ‘Holiday’ where he says,”call me old fashioned, but one doesn’t have sex with a woman who is unconscious.”

Historically, women raped at Cal Poly or in our county have many hurdles and humiliations in seeking justice… and for some reason… they never get it. BTW, with this in mind, I would hope that young women think long and hard before going to a frat house, drinking from an open container or being alone with anyone you don’t know well.


This felony case should be tried before a judge or jury. Sometimes a D/A allows their filing criteria to be ‘overly’ motivated the need for positive stats (wins).

The Gimlet Eye

Pfarr viewed his silence as a sign of guilt.

“Usually guilty people are the ones who don’t want to talk to us, from my experience,” Pfarr said.

Silence IS NOT a “sign of guilt.” It is a sign of PRUDENCE. It is rarely, if ever, prudent for a citizen to speak to the police. Certainly it would not be if a citizen is accused of a crime. The prudent citizen will do his talking with his own attorney, and in court under oath, nowhere else.

A “statement to the police” CANNOT help the accused, but can only hurt him. That’s a fact, because such evidence cannot be used in court for his defense, but CAN be used by the prosecution against him.

So, why make a “statement to the police”? It can’t help you, but can only hurt you. To do it is sheer stupidity!


Boy, you sure have it in for fraternities, don’t you!! Another case of one’s “perceptions” tarnishing an entire group.

Even Pfarr admitted that his job is to make arrests based on probable cause and not the higher standard in court of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The District Attorney found that they could not meet that higher standard either. It was additionally reported by an investigator that interviews with witnesses showed the woman engaged in sexual conduct with another man at the party in public view before she had relations with Trupiano. And the accuser made a sexual solicitation of yet another man at the party as well. No wonder there was bruising!!

Pfarr’s job ended with the arrest. He is stepping out of bounds by questioning the decision of the DA’s office. And CCN is stepping out of bounds by not delving deeper into this story and reporting all sides.


I’m shocked that Pfarr is publicly stating his opinion. Pfarr is opening up himself and perhaps even the PD for nice lawsuit.

I don’t know enough about this from this article to make an honest opinion of guilt on Trupiano’s part. But if I were the DA I would be looking to take matters further regarding Pfarr’s conduct.


Pfarr can offer his professional opinion, his conclusion does not invite litigation that can be leveled against him personally or against the SLOPD. What do you think happens when the DA decides to charge a defendant? The entire county knows what the police and DA think the defendant did. Just because the DA decided not to charge the case doesn’t mean Trupiano isn’t guilty. Detective Pfarr can tell us what he believes/knows Trupiano is guilty of all day long.

Trupiano’s attorney offered his opinion in the Tribune and they enjoyed a write up about how Trupiano has been damaged by the allegations (unjustly leveled by this horrible young woman) and the subsequent arrest that ensued. He was rather eloquent in blaming his current tarnished reputation on Pfarr’s decision to arrest him. Pfarr has simply responded and clarified the reasons that the arrest was appropriate and indicated that if it were up to him, Trupiano would still be under arrest.


oops, see above answer.


T.G.E., you are absolutely correct!! I’m astounded at Pfarr’s comment.

If police can properly investigate and supply the necessary evidence to the DA to prosecute this case, then Trupiano should swing from a tree limb if he’s found guilty in a court of law. Until that happens, Pfarr should keep his Pie Hole shut and do his job better!

Mr. Holly

This is especially true when the courts have declared that it is ok for the police to present false evidence and/or lie while questioning someone. You would have to be a fool to talk to the police without an attorney whether or guilty or not. This is why the conviction rate is so high amongst the indigent and/or ignorant. They are easy prey for conviction and re-election to the DA’s position.

Politics as usual.


What do you mean a police statement cannot help a citizen accused of a crime?

Once it’s admitted into trial evidence, both sides get to use it to flail away at each other as much as they want.

Understood, that far too many times the police reports are like a chapter from Alice in Wonderland. However, the police officer’s creative reporting doesn’t stop his reports from being entered as evidence in a trial.


Geez – talk about one-sided, reporting. It would appear that this piece should be under “Opinions” rather than “Daily Briefs” as it is definitely expressing the opinion of one person – Pfarr. And, it leaves out much of the other details reported in other local media which were taken into account by the District Attorney in their decision not to pursue this matter. I am ashamed of you, CCN!


Complaints about editorial style and or reportage are ‘thin ice’ for invited commentary , this comment restored to maintain the conversational continuity.


Except in rare occasions, I don’t like it when media outlets criticize other outlets because of a difference in the approach to how they cover/editorialize stories. I think it looks unprofessional.

I’m a big girl. I can read articles from different sources and decide which ones appear to be credible and which ones do not.

If CCN was to criticize the Trib for their screwball kid-glove handling of SLO government and other powers in our community, they’d be writing articles about it every danged day.

It is cases like the Mason case where CCN should be tempted to crow an “I-TOLD-YOU-SO!!!” but they usually take the high road and, to my knowledge, have not shoved a big “nanny-nanny-boo-boo” down the Trib’s metaphorical throat in obvious cases like the Mason case, where the Trib totally dropped the ball and CCN took the risks which ended up with the DA finally deciding to prosecute mason..