He was the sort of guy who could paint a sandwich board with a creative flair. He went by the moniker “Oakengard” and was deep into Dungeons and Dragons.
But according to the Santa Cruz County District Attorney’s Office, Ciriaco Johnson was not just someone who preyed on teen girls whom he met while serving as a youth leader at the Boys and Girls Club in Scotts Valley. He was also a budding human trafficker.
Not so, said Judge Stephen Siegel, during a preliminary hearing held last June—at least not in terms of the evidence presented up to that point.
He dismissed the three attempted human trafficking accusations—as well as a lewd act with a minor charge—leveled against the young man, who is now 26, by prosecutors. Siegel held Johnson to answer for 14 other crimes, including instances of communicating with a minor for the purpose of soliciting a lewd act, tattooing a person under 18 and furnishing minors with marijuana.
Johnson has denied all the charges.
The evidence presented at the prelim suggested Johnson was trying to establish a “sugar daddy” relationship with multiple 15-year-old girls; but there were no third parties involved, the court found.
Thanks to case law established a few years back in the prosecution of Eliberto Cruz Jacobo—a middle-aged man who used Facebook (under the catfishing moniker of “Marlissa”) to “friend” minor females and push them towards prostitution—“attempted human trafficking” was a bit of a reach by the People in the Scotts Valley prosecution, according to Siegel.
“I am bound by Jacobo, but I don’t believe the facts are close enough in this case,” the Santa Cruz County Superior Court judge said, per a transcript. “I agree with the court in Jacobo that he was…trying to procure them to become prostitutes. I don’t believe the evidence in this case showed Mr. Johnson was doing that.”
But earlier this year, ADA Kristal Salcido dropped a missive claiming: “The Magistrate did not correctly interpret or apply People v. Jacobo…It is because of the error of the application of law that the court should find probable cause exists as to Counts 1, 5, and 8 in the First Amended Information.” Those counts refer to the “attempted human trafficking” accusations that the People are trying to revive.
That document was originally dated Feb. 6, but was ultimately filed with the court May 8.
Johnson is currently out on bail—with a GPS tracker—and is not allowed to have minors in his home (among other conditions).
His lawyer, Santa Cruz-based James McMillin, admits his client offered “to pay for sexual favors” from three teen girls he met at the Boys and Girls Club, in early July 2024. But he says the girls all declined.
When one of the girls’ mothers became aware of her daughter’s communication with Johnson, she went to the Scotts Valley Police Department, who started catfishing Johnson, he said in a recent filing. Officers set up a sting and nabbed the suspect. This led to police interviews with two of the first girl’s teen friends.
“After defendant’s arrest was covered by local news, other participants from the Boys and Girls Club were interviewed,” wrote McMillin, adding two sisters were then interviewed and recounted messages they felt were possibly illicit.
The defense lawyer claims many of the messages his client sent to those teens, while potentially inappropriate, don’t rise to the level of criminal conduct.
“By all accounts, defendant Johnson interacted with a large number of clients at the Boys and Girls club for years. After he left that employment, in the month of July of 2024, he made a major error in judgment with a few of the underage girls that he had met. That is not proof that he had criminal intent with each and every girl he had spoken to over the years,” he said.
But the prosecution is committed to making the charges against Johnson stick.
“Defendant worked with teens and children and went on field trips with the children,” Salcido wrote in a filing, noting Johnson first asked for the phone number of one of the victims while on a Boys and Girls Club field trip.
He continued to communicate with the girl and her friends after leaving the club, including inviting them to visit him at his new job at a cafe in Santa Cruz, where he would give them lots of special attention.
“The messages…soon turned inappropriate,” the prosecution noted.
“I can touch you and you can touch me and possible other stuff that’s comfortable,” he wrote the girl via messages on Snapchat that “disappear,” during summer 2024—offering money for sexual favors, the filing states.
“The cash offers began at $100 and kept going up to $800 dollars,” Salcido said in the court papers, noting the girl made it clear she wasn’t interested. “He then offered her money not to tell anyone, initially $40 then $80.”
According to the DA’s Office, he also tried to put the girl on a “monthly allowance” to secure an ongoing sexual relationship.
After the cops got involved, Johnson said he would pay $50-$100 for each sexual act—and even $150-$200 for anything “very serious.”
“But if it’s just touching, it’s $150 a month,” he typed.
“Ultimately, they decided on meeting at 9:00 a.m. at Target in Scotts Valley and agreed on a final price of $150 dollars for touching,” the prosecution’s document reads. “Defendant had slightly over $150 dollars cash on him when he was arrested…Defendant also admitted to bringing a marijuana gummy bear to furnish to the minor when he performed the lewd acts…Further, Defendant admitted requesting photos in exchange for money as well.”
He also had an axe in his vehicle.
Johnson’s lawyer doesn’t deny his client asked for pictures from the girl. But he says there’s no proof he was requesting sexual imagery.
“The mention of photos was merely as an ice-breaker if she did not feel entirely comfortable with touching. Defendant did not ask for any specific content in the photos. While it may be presumed from context that defendant was suggesting ‘sexy’ style photos, he certainly did not solicit the type of content that is defined by Penal Code section 311.4(d) as ‘sexual content,’” he wrote in a Feb. 26 filing.
And, he stated, the messages go against the prosecution’s case for attempted human trafficking, since they show Johnson was trying “to persuade her to enter into a relationship with him exclusively.”
McMillin argued, “The evidence is that defendant Johnson, although several years older than this group of young ladies, interacted with them as a true friend and acted as a peer with them. His behavior was such that the group considered him gay and/or autistic. Given this role or self-perception as a peer, his interest cannot be said to be motivated by an ‘unnatural or abnormal’ sexual interest in ‘children.’ Rather, he appears to be attracted to individual girls in this group.”
But the prosecution points out that the creepy messages weren’t just with a couple girls. For example, Johnson struck up a friendship with a girl he met at the Boys and Girls Club back when she was 12, the DA’s Office says.
“They knew each other through playing Dungeons and Dragons, and eventually any type of role playing became sexualized with Defendant,” the prosecution wrote. “She felt very uncomfortable with Defendant and began feeling that way when she was 12 years old, when Defendant asked her what her ‘dream date’ was (Defendant was 18 at the time). She responded and Defendant stated ‘dang, I’m gonna have to wait five years to do that with you, then.’”
At one point in their relationship, the People says, he sent explicit messages as part of a Never Have I Ever game. Johnson also continually brought up the idea of being a “sugar daddy” to the girl—and eventually got her to send him a photo of her wearing a new pair of stockings, the DA’s Office says.
The defense says the conversations look a lot worse, in retrospect, than they actually were.
Johnson is due back in court on May 22.
