SONOMA COUNTY, CA — Attorneys laid out sharply conflicting versions of nearly two decades of alleged sexual misconduct Wednesday as a Sonoma County jury heard opening statements in the civil trial against former Windsor Mayor Dominic Foppoli.
Day 1 began with the women's attorney accusing Dominic Foppoli and his political adviser, Robert Stryk, of waging a "scorched earth" campaign against the seven plaintiffs and ended with the emotional testimony of Jane Doe 1.
Representing seven anonymous women identified as Jane Does, Traci Carrillo told jurors they would hear evidence that Foppoli used his political influence, status as a winery owner, alcohol, and, in some instances, alleged drugging to sexually assault women between 2001 and 2020. Foppoli denied the allegation, and prosecutors declined to charge him.
A lawsuit was also filed by reality TV personality Farrah Abraham, accusing Foppoli of drugging and raping her at his friend’s home in Palm Beach, Florida, in 2021, The Press Democrat reported. Abraham's lawyers told The Press Democrat that she had “blacked out” after sipping an old-fashioned cocktail given to her by Foppoli.
In all, 13 women have accused Foppoli of sexual assault and misconduct, according to reports.
During Monday's opening statements, Carrillo said Stryk boasted in a What'sApp message to Foppoli that he tried to get under the skin of Jane Doe 7 in order to intimidate her and discourage others from coming forward with accusations that he sexually assaulted them while they were drugged or restrained.
The complaint alleges that Stryk threatened to release embarrassing information and "sex tapes" involving at least two plaintiffs who publicly accused Foppoli. It also alleges that dozens of unnamed women were victimized.
Carrillo argued that the women delayed reporting because of trauma, shame, fear of retaliation, and what she described as Foppoli's prominence in Sonoma County politics, the wine industry, and the Active 20-30 civic organization.
Foppoli has denied the allegations. His attorney, Andrew Watters, urged jurors to set aside emotion and publicity surrounding the case, arguing the lawsuit involves seven unrelated encounters between consenting adults.
He said the evidence would show the relationships and sexual encounters were consensual, that Foppoli has never been criminally charged, and that the plaintiffs are attempting to reinterpret events through a different lens years later.
The lawsuit, originally filed in Sonoma County Superior Court on April 4, 2022, accuses Foppoli, Christopher Creek Winery, and Active 20-30 organizations of enabling or failing to prevent sexual assaults.
The women allege sexual assault, negligence, gender violence, civil rights violations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and other claims in the lawsuit. They seek compensatory and punitive damages. The amount was not cited in the courtroom.
Carrillo opened arguments by quoting several messages she attributed to Foppoli, including, "When a woman says no, she really means yes," and "You don't need roofies if you give them enough wine."
She argued those statements foreshadowed a pattern jurors would hear throughout the trial.
According to Carrillo's opening statement, the women came from different backgrounds but shared common experiences.
Some met Foppoli through politics, others through Christopher Creek Winery, and others through the Santa Rosa chapter of Active 20-30, a civic organization for adults ages 20 to 39 that focuses on charitable fundraising and community service. The club also played an important role for the political careers of two of the women.
Carrillo described a social environment centered on drinking at winery gatherings, conferences, and political events, where she alleged Foppoli isolated women before assaulting them.
She told jurors that several women initially did not understand they had been raped because sexual assault within dating relationships, or while intoxicated, was not widely recognized when the alleged incidents occurred. Carrillo argued that changed public understanding following the #MeToo movement helped some women recognize what had happened years later.
The complaint alleges:
Foppoli denies the allegations.
Carrillo also argued the case extends beyond Foppoli personally. She told jurors they would hear evidence that leaders within Active 20-30 received complaints years before media reports emerged but failed to investigate adequately or remove Foppoli from the organization.
She further argued Christopher Creek Winery became a recurring location where women were allegedly supplied alcohol before assaults occurred. Those allegations also appear throughout the original complaint, which contends both organizations knew or should have known about earlier complaints but failed to act.
The defense countered that every allegation must be evaluated individually rather than as evidence of a broader pattern.
Watters, Foppoli's attorney, said the women were adults capable of consenting even when alcohol was involved and argued the evidence would show Foppoli reasonably believed the encounters were consensual.
He challenged why several plaintiffs maintained relationships, friendships, or political support for Foppoli after the alleged assaults and questioned why many allegations surfaced publicly only after 2021.
An attorney representing the Santa Rosa Active 20-30 chapter separately argued the local organization cannot be held responsible for conduct that allegedly occurred during a national convention in Reno.
He told jurors local officers lacked authority over national events and acted appropriately once they learned of allegations against Foppoli, eventually expelling him from the organization after public reports surfaced.
He also argued that even if individual members learned of Jane Doe No. 4's allegations, that knowledge should not automatically be imputed to the local chapter. In an unusual statement, he asked the jury to limit the damages to $10,000 if members did find Santa Rosa 20-30 responsible.
“We’re going to ask for a lot of money,” Carrillo had already told the jury. “But it’s appropriate.”
A recurring theme in Carrillo's opening argument centered on events after the allegations became public.
She described text messages and public statements involving Republican political consultant Robert Stryk, who represented Foppoli publicly after the allegations emerged. Carrillo argued the communications showed an effort to discredit accusers, including references to using a "Trump playbook" and discussing release of an alleged sex video involving one plaintiff. Those allegations also appear in the civil complaint.
The opening statements repeatedly referenced the San Francisco Chronicle's April 8, 2021, investigation, which first published allegations from four women and ultimately led to Foppoli's resignation as Windsor mayor.
In the months that followed, additional women publicly accused him of sexual assault or misconduct, bringing the total number of public accusers to 13.
Foppoli’s wine company settled another lawsuit filed by a Montana woman who said Foppoli raped her multiple times in 2020 when she was 18, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
Foppoli served on the Windsor Town Council for six years then as the mayor for about two and a half years. He was forced to resign in 2021.
The reporting also prompted a Sonoma County Sheriff's Office criminal investigation that was later transferred to the California Attorney General. Prosecutors ultimately declined to file criminal charges, citing insufficient evidence on charges that remained within the statute of limitations.
In 2022, Esther Lemus, a Windsor Town council member and former deputy district attorney, ran for mayor of Windsor. She told law enforcement that Foppoli had drugged and raped her after they attended a community event in February 2020. Lemus was previously a Sonoma County deputy district attorney. The District Attorney’s Office recused itself from the criminal case after she reported her allegations against Foppoli, according to reports.
In a civil trial, jurors are being asked whether the plaintiffs have proven their claims by a preponderance of the evidence — meaning the allegations are more likely true than not — rather than beyond a reasonable doubt. Only nine of the 12 jurors must agree to reach a civil verdict.
Sign up for free local newsletters and alerts for the
Healdsburg, CA Patch
Patch.com is the nationwide leader in hyperlocal news.
Visit Patch.com to find your town today.