Bacon ipsum dolor! An h1!

Formed in Santa Rosa in 1984, Victim’s Family is a band that infused all the elements of the hardcore punk scene with an expansive and experimental edge that shifted into a jazzy, funky realm all their own. Their satirical lyrics and blistering instrumentals made them one of the most respected and challenging acts of the decade. VictimÕs Family turn 30 this year, and they’re throwing a rocking shindig to celebrate. Joined by other local rock and punk bands, the band plays a career-spanning set of songs, voted on by the fans, when they take the stage on Saturday, Sept. 27, at the Phoenix Theater, 201 Washington St., Petaluma. 8pm. $12. 707.762.3565.

Sonoma County Supervisor Efren Carrillo took the stand in his peeking trial on Thursday afternoon saying he has a bigger problem with alcohol than he let on to officers. He said that he told officers he had “two beers and a couple of really strong mixed drinks,” but said he had actually had much more than that. He says he was trying to hide it and was in denial. “At the time, I was accustomed to downplaying and minimalizing the struggle.”

He told his defense attorney Chris Andrian there were two reasons why he went over to Jane Doe’s apartment at 3:30 that morning: “The fact that I was drinking” was one and “I was hoping to rekindle some kind of relationship” was the other. He later admitted, under cross-examination, that there really was no relationship to begin with, and he was basing his perception off of two brief interactions.

“My sense of ego,” “My sense of entitlement,” and “My sense of arrogance made me think it was a good idea to go over to Jane Doe’s house,” Carrillo told the defense. “It was selfish,” he said. “It had nothing to do with Jane Doe, only with me.”

He added, “There is no excuse.”

Career admitted during his testimony that he had damaged Jane Doe’s bedroom screen on her window. He says he didn’t tell officers at first, because he was “unwilling to admit I had done anything wrong.”

During a brutal hour-long cross-examination, in which Carrillo looked uncomfortable, emotional and shaken at times, prosecutor Cody Hunt asked which hand he had broken the screen with and put it inside her bedroom, because he had two beers in one hand, and his cell phone to the other. It had been established previously in the trial that his boxer briefs did not have pockets, and Hunt surmised that he must have put his hand holding the cell phone inside her window. He then intimated that Carrillo took pictures inside the woman’s bedroom. Hunt informed Carrillo during his cross-examination that he had a copy of everything on his cell phone, to which Carrillo replied he knew. Nothing from the phone was entered into evidence.

The supervisor admitted that he has a problem with alcohol and ego, but those aren’t illegal. What’s really being discussed is whether he peeked inside the woman’s apartment to which he says he did not. He did admit knocking on her door at 3:30 in the morning in his underwear and walking around to her back patio through the gate because he thought he saw a light on coming out of the sliding glass door in the back. But he maintained that he did not have a recollection of whether or not he looked into the apartment, and at one point explicitly said he did not look into the apartment.

He did admit hoping to spark a sexual relationship with the woman whom he called “very attractive,” even after being dropped off by his girlfriend from a nightclub about an hour and a half prior. When asked by Hunt, Carrillo stated that same woman who dropped him off that night is still his girlfriend today, though she was not in court at the time of his testimony.

The trial resumed at 1:30pm Thursday and the defense did not redirect the cross examination. The jury went to deliberation immediately after the lunch break.