Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Kollmar

United States District Court, N.D. California

September 9, 2019

DON KOLLMAR, Defendant.



         On May 6, 2019, the United States filed a complaint under 18 U.S.C. § 3184, seeking to provisionally arrest Defendant Don Kollmar for extradition to Canada. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) On July 10, 2019, the United States filed its Memorandum in Support of Extradition. (Extradition Memo., Dkt. No. 39.)

         Pending before the Court is Defendant's motion for discovery. (Def.'s Mot., Dkt. No. 44.) Having considered the parties' filings, oral arguments, and the relevant legal authority, the court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendant's motion for discovery.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On May 6, 2019, the instant criminal complaint was filed, alleging that Defendant was wanted in Canada. (Compl. ¶ 5.) The complaint alleged that in 1997, B.B. reported to Canadian law enforcement that Defendant had sexually assaulted her while she and her family belonged to a religious group, the “Students of Light.” (Compl. ¶ 7a.) B.B. was eleven or twelve when her family first joined, while Defendant was a member who had a close connection to the group's leader. (Compl. ¶ 7a.) B.B. stated that Defendant would spend time alone with her under the guise of providing her with instruction on the group's beliefs, but would sexually molest and abuse her starting when she was twelve or thirteen. (Comp. ¶¶ 7b-c.) On Mother's Day weekend in 1977, when B.B. was fourteen, Defendant penetrated her. (Compl. ¶ 7d.)

         Per the complaint, B.B. described her relationship with Defendant by saying that Defendant was a spiritual leader “chosen by God.” (Compl. ¶ 7e.) She felt like she was “chosen by God to be with him.” Defendant would tell B.B. that he intended to marry her once she was sixteen, and B.B. felt that it was her “responsibility” and “honour to be with him, and married to him.” (Compl. ¶ 7e.) When B.B. was sixteen, she reported Defendant's behavior to her parents. (Compl. ¶ 7f.) B.B.'s parents consulted with an attorney provided by the group, who advised them against lodging a formal complaint. (Compl. ¶ 7f.)

         Following B.B.'s statement to the Canadian authorities in 1997, an initial arrest warrant for Defendant was issued. (Compl. ¶ 7e.) On November 28, 2018, an Information was sworn before the Ontario Court of Justice, charging Defendant with: (1) indecent assault on a female, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“CCC”) § 149; (2) rape, contrary to CCC § 143(b)(iii), and (3) rape of a female, contrary to CCC § 146(2). (Compl. ¶ 6.) On December 24, 2018, an arrest warrant was issued. (Compl. ¶ 7.)

         On May 3, 2019, Defendant was arrested in this district. (Dkt. No. 6.) On May 6, 2019, the United States filed a memorandum in opposition to bail for Defendant. (Dkt. No. 4.) On May 10, 2019, Defendant filed a response regarding bail. (Dkt. No. 9.) In seeking bail, Defendant argued in part that he could not be extradited on Count 1 or 2 because “there is no federal analogue to rape by false statements . . . .” (Id. at 11.) Defendant also argued there was no federal analogue as to Count 3. (Id.)

         On May 17, 2019, the Court granted Defendant release on a secured bond. (Dkt. No. 28.) On July 10, 2019, the United States filed a Memorandum in Support of Extradition, stating that Defendant “is wanted by Canada for trial on charges of Rape and Indecent Assault, in violation of sections 143, 144, and 149 of the [CCC].” (Extradition Memo. at 2.) The Memorandum included an affidavit by Detective Constable Robert Speakman. (Speakman Aff., Dkt. No. 39-1.) Mr. Speakman stated that on February 25, 1997, B.B. provided a statement to Canadian authorities that Defendant had sexually assaulted her between 1974 and 1978, when B.B. was between the ages of twelve and sixteen. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 4.) B.B. provided both an audio-video recorded statement and a written statement that she had prepared in advance. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 4.)

         Based on the audio-video recorded statement and her written statement, Mr. Speakman stated that in 1974, B.B.'s family became involved in the Students of Light group. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 5.) Defendant was a “spiritual advisor” and licensed minister, and the “right hand assistant” of the group's leader, John Hanas. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 5.) Defendant began to show a strong interest in B.B. when she was twelve, and started spending time alone with her. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 8.) Defendant would tell B.B. how unique and important he was, and that B.B. was a very special person. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 8.) Defendant also told B.B. that he had a “very pure and unique love” for her, and that he had intended to wait until she was sixteen years old before approaching her, but that he could not wait any longer. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 9.) Defendant emphasized that she should not tell anyone, and criticized her family, telling her that she had to separate herself from them. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 11.)

         Over time, Defendant became more abusive, controlling when B.B. slept, went to the bathroom, brushed her teeth, showered, and brushed her hair. (Speakman Aff. ¶¶ 12-14.) Defendant slapped her on three occasions, would threaten to hit her, and grabbed and twisted her wrist several times. (Speakman Aff. ¶¶ 15-16.) Defendant would also tell B.B. that her will or desire “was not valid.” (Speakman Aff. ¶ 18.) B.B. stated she “felt paralyzed by fear in [his] presence” and would do what he wanted to avoid making him upset with her. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 17.) She felt fear even during the time she was away from Defendant. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 19.)

         B.B. described how Defendant touched her in a sexual manner, including when Defendant penetrated her during Mother's Day weekend in 1977. (Speakman Aff. ¶¶ 20-22, 25, 27, 29, 31, 32.) B.B. further stated that 99% of the time, Defendant would prelude the sexual assaults by verbally humiliating and demoralizing her, yelling at her and telling her that she was stupid, incompetent, worthless, and a terrible person. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 34.)

         In June 1979, arrangements were underway for B.B. to marry Defendant. (Speakman Aff. ¶ 35.) That month, B.B. lost consciousness and was taken to the hospital, where she told her parents about Defendant's abuse. (Speakman Aff. ¶¶ 35-36.) The relationship ended, and Defendant was “enraged” by the interference of B.B.'s parents. (Speakman Aff. ¶¶ 36-37.)

         Defendant allegedly attempted to coerce people into following him rather than John Hanas; failing at that, he returned to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.