A severely retarded resident of a care facility sued it for damages suffered in a sexual assault by a handyman on the facility’s premises.  The decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding portions of a police report which the plaintiff relied on in opposition to the facility’s summary judgment motion.  The police report was excepted from the hearsay rule as an official record.  (Evid. Code 1280.)  Several of the statements the report recorded were by the facility’s owner.  As they could be interpreted to concede he had notice of the handyman’s history of improper conduct, the statements were exempted as admissions against interest by a party or a party’s agent.  (Evid. Code 1220, 1222.)  Statements by other employees of the facility which were recorded in the police report were admissible as non-hearsay statements showing the employees’ knowledge that the handyman was present when he shouldn’t have been and that he had struck up an intimate relationship with plaintiff.