A 57-year-old coach connected to a North Bay youth basketball program was arrested this week and accused of lewd acts against a 15-year-old girl, months after the alleged conduct is said to have occurred. Here is what the charges describe and how a civil claim against a sports program can move separately from any criminal case.
Reviewed by Abuse Justice Center · Updated 2026-07-28
Figures drawn from Marin County jail records and local reporting on the arrest.
According to police, a 57-year-old coach was arrested and booked into Marin County Jail on three felony counts of lewd acts upon a minor, along with a special allegation covering abuse of a position of trust. Investigators say the alleged conduct involved a 15-year-old girl and took place in May 2026, with the arrest coming roughly two months later. He was held on $250,000 bail and was scheduled for arraignment.
Police have said the alleged crime happened in May but have declined to release further details while the case is active. The coach worked with a North Bay youth basketball program, which told families in an email that it had suspended him pending an investigation and that, based on its understanding, the incident did not involve one of its own program participants.
A youth sports organization distancing itself from an incident is a common first response, but it does not resolve the questions that matter most for families: how the organization vetted this coach before hiring him, what training and supervision it required once he had access to minors, and whether anyone had raised concerns about his conduct before this arrest.
Those questions apply just as much to any program, gym, league, or academy that puts an adult in regular, unsupervised contact with children. A position of trust, the kind coaches, tutors, and instructors hold by design, is exactly the kind of relationship that a civil claim against an organization is built to examine.
The criminal case here will focus narrowly on whether this one coach committed the specific acts charged. A civil claim asks a broader question: did the organizations around him, the basketball program, any gym or school that hosted his sessions, or any club that employed him, do enough to prevent this kind of harm in the first place.
That distinction matters because a civil claim can move on its own timeline. It does not need to wait for an arraignment, a plea, or a verdict, and it does not disappear if the criminal case is delayed, plea-bargained down, or never results in a conviction at all.
If a child in your life has had contact with a coach, instructor, or program leader and something feels off, even something you cannot fully explain yet, it is worth writing down what you have noticed and when, before memory fades. That kind of record can matter later, whether or not you ever pursue a legal claim.
A confidential conversation with an attorney who handles youth sports and institutional abuse claims can help you understand what to do next, including how to request records from a program about how it screens and supervises coaches. These consultations are free, and attorneys who take these cases work on contingency, so there is no cost unless they recover money for you.
An arrest like this one is a hard reminder that any program built around one-on-one access to kids carries risk. Here is what matters if you have concerns about a coach, instructor, or the program that employs them.
Abuse Justice Center is a lawyer-matching and advocacy service, not a law firm, and nothing here is legal advice. Matching and consultations are free, and network attorneys work on contingency. Need support now? The RAINN hotline is 800-656-4673, 24/7.
Not for purposes of a civil claim against any program, gym, or school where the coach worked or had access to minors. What matters is how that specific organization screened and supervised him.
Any organization that gave the coach access to minors could potentially be examined in a civil claim, not only the program mentioned in initial reporting.
Not necessarily. It is worth discussing your specific timeline with an attorney rather than assuming too much time has passed.
No. A consultation is meant to help you understand what evidence might support a claim, not something you need to arrive with already prepared.