Alleged attack leaves victim with lasting injuries; diversion decision sparks debate
More than two and a half years ago, Christian Hornburg was brutally attacked at a Santa Monica train station. According to court records, the assailant, identified as Job Taylor, allegedly struck Hornburg with a metal pipe, stomped on his head while shouting racial slurs, and left him with a brain bleed and long-term physical and cognitive injuries.
Taylor was initially charged with attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon and hate crime enhancements. In March, Judge Lana Kim granted a request for mental-health diversion, saying the program exists "in essence to treat people who have a mental health diagnosis." That decision drew sharp criticism from Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman and from Hornburg, who remains in a care facility and uses a wheelchair.
What diversion means in this case
The Office of Diversion and Reentry (ODR) places eligible defendants in supportive housing and pairs them with treatment, supervision and services as an alternative to incarceration. Prosecutors have emphasized that many ODR placements are not locked facilities. "This is a facility at any moment of any day that he can walk out of and they won't stop him," DA Hochman said.
Taylor has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder and an opioid use disorder. His public defender argued Taylor does not harbor racial animus, noting he shares housing with Black inmates. The DA countered with jail records showing a psychologist observed "hostile and aggressive behaviors towards custody staff."
Numbers and outcomes
ODR reported that in 2024 there were likely between 2,700 and 2,800 people enrolled in diversion programs. Officials said they lost contact with roughly 400–500 people and that about 100–200 returned to jail. The DA estimated a noncompletion rate near 24 percent, while ODR's estimate is about 17 percent — a gap prosecutors called "an incredibly serious" failure rate.
Research is mixed. A RAND study found participants in a Rapid Diversion Program were three times less likely to be rearrested than those who were incarcerated, and the Vera Institute of Justice reported that people who complete diversion are 43 percent more likely to secure employment.
Legal developments and next steps
Last month the California Court of Appeal granted the DA's petition to vacate Judge Kim's diversion order, concluding the record did not show that Taylor would not pose an unreasonable risk to public safety if diverted. Taylor will now face trial on the original charges, including attempted murder with a hate-crime enhancement; pretrial hearings are scheduled for December. If convicted, he could face life in prison.
Victim's condition
Hornburg described lasting impairments from the attack: damaged tendons and wrist muscles, persistent headaches, vertigo, weakened legs and impaired balance after extended immobility. "I got a brain bleed … I got a couple of lumps in my head where he hit me ... kicked me in the head," he said, expressing frustration that diversion was considered for his alleged attacker.
Voices on both sides
DA Nathan Hochman framed the dispute around public safety and victims' rights: "These cases should have resulted in years of prison time." Supporters of diversion emphasize treatment and long-term accountability. Troy Vaughn of the Los Angeles Regional Reentry Partnership said, "Diversion is intended to address root causes like trauma, mental health, and poverty. It's not about avoiding accountability. It's about accountability that works."
The case highlights the tension between treating defendants with serious mental-health and substance-use disorders and protecting public safety and victims' interests. The appellate decision means the matter will be resolved in a criminal trial rather than through diversion.
