A 75-year-old retired Canadian schoolteacher is pursuing legal action against California law enforcement officials after spending 13 days in jail due to a case of mistaken identity linked to an online predator’s activities.
Richard Zilinskas and his wife Mildred were arrested in October 2024 during what was meant to be a routine day trip to Niagara Falls after crossing from Canada into the United States. The arrest stemmed from an investigation by the Monterey Police Department into communications between an alleged 48-year-old man from Ohio, who identified himself as David, and a 13-year-old girl in Monterey, California.
The investigation revealed that the minor had sent explicit photographs to the man, and the two had discussed arranging a meeting at a hotel. The connection to Zilinskas emerged when investigators discovered that the email account used by the suspect had been created using Mildred Zilinskas’ phone number, which the actual perpetrator had apparently selected at random.
Detective Michael Garcia of the Monterey Police Department obtained a photograph of Richard Zilinskas during the investigation, which clearly showed he was significantly older than the 48-year-old suspect they were pursuing. Despite this discrepancy, Garcia proceeded to work with Deputy District Attorney Billie Gibson to secure an arrest warrant for Zilinskas.
Following his arrest and 13-day imprisonment, all charges against Zilinskas were dropped. A state court subsequently issued a factual finding declaring him innocent of all allegations. The wrongful detention has prompted Zilinskas to file an amended complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, bringing claims of unreasonable seizure and violations of the California Bane Act.
Mildred Zilinskas has joined the lawsuit with a loss of consortium claim, seeking compensation for the emotional and relational harm caused by her husband’s wrongful imprisonment. The claim falls under the 14th Amendment’s familial association provision, which allows family members to pursue legal action against government officials for unconstitutional interference with their relationships.
During a recent motion-to-dismiss hearing, attorneys for Monterey County and the city of Monterey argued that the detective and prosecutor should be granted immunity under California law, which protects public employees acting within the scope of their duties, even in cases involving malicious conduct or lack of probable cause.
U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts expressed skepticism about the defense’s arguments, particularly regarding Detective Garcia’s actions. The judge noted that Garcia’s apparent goal was to secure Zilinskas’ arrest and that he took all necessary steps to achieve that objective, regardless of whether the correct person was being targeted.
Walter Walker, representing the Zilinskas family, revealed during the hearing that he had received documentation indicating Garcia had admitted to an Ontario official that he had arrested the wrong person. However, this acknowledgment was not reflected in the official case record, as Garcia had not provided an affidavit or declaration to that effect.
The case highlights concerns about investigative procedures and the potential consequences of mistaken identity in criminal investigations. The lawsuit seeks to hold the officials accountable for their role in the wrongful imprisonment, with Zilinskas’ malicious prosecution claim having already survived a previous motion to dismiss.
Judge Pitts has taken all motions under submission and indicated a decision would be forthcoming. The case continues to move through the federal court system as both parties prepare for potential discovery proceedings.
Leave a Reply