Former Sheriff Alex Villanueva plans to file a $25-million federal lawsuit towards Los Angeles County for placing a “Do Not Rehire” notation in his personnel file after an oversight panel mentioned he harassed and discriminated towards two county staff.
In early 2022, a type of staff — Inspector Common Max Huntsman — accused then-Sheriff Villanueva of “canine whistling to the extremists he caters to” when he repeatedly referred to the inspector normal by his foreign-sounding beginning title, Max-Gustaf. A couple of weeks later, Villanueva publicly accused Huntsman of being a Holocaust denier.
Across the similar time, a justice deputy for county Supervisor Hilda Solis filed a criticism accusing Villanueva of concentrating on and harassing girls of shade. Final fall, the County Fairness Oversight Panel sustained complaints in each instances and really helpful Villanueva — who had been voted out of workplace by that time — be deemed ineligible for rehire.
Villanueva’s lawyer known as the advice — which the division in the end adopted — a “deadly blow” to the previous sheriff’s prolonged profession in a 196-page tort claim letter dated Wednesday. The letter accused the county of “scarlet-lettering” Villanueva with “defamatory allegations” throughout a secretive authorized course of that gave him no likelihood to reply.
“The county spent 5 years defaming me and attempting to persuade the general public that I used to be this horrible human being,” Villanueva informed The Instances on Wednesday. “The truth was the precise reverse.”
He and his lawyer, Carney Shegerian, additionally mentioned the county violated deadlines specified by the state’s Public Security Officers Procedural Invoice of Rights by putting the “Do Not Rehire” notation in his file greater than a 12 months after receiving the complaints about him.
The Sheriff’s Division didn’t instantly supply remark.
In an emailed assertion late Wednesday, legal professionals for the county mentioned they hadn’t but evaluated the declare.
“At this level, nonetheless, we are able to say that the County takes significantly its statutory requirement to be clear about its peace officers’ actions, together with the kind of sustained misconduct that led to a ‘Do Not Rehire’ advice for former Sheriff Villanueva,” the assertion mentioned.
The tensions that led to the formal fairness complaints started not lengthy after Villanueva took workplace. After ousting his predecessor in 2018, Villanueva repeatedly sparred with county oversight officers in addition to the Board of Supervisors. He leveled private assaults towards Huntsman, asked county supervisors to remove him from his watchdog publish and ultimately banned him from the division’s amenities and databases, saying he was a suspect in two legal instances.
Huntsman was extremely essential of the sheriff’s dealing with of the division. He revealed a number of investigatory studies accusing Villanueva of “illegal conduct” and issued subpoenas attempting to pressure his cooperation in oversight investigations.
In March 2022, Huntsman filed a criticism accusing Villanueva of sending an e-mail “all through the Sheriff’s Division that was a racially biased assault.” Within the e-mail, Villanueva allegedly referred to Huntsman by his full title.
When Villanueva discovered about Huntsman’s criticism that month, he in flip told The Times editorial board about it, including within the new declare about Huntsman’s supposed denial of the Holocaust.
“You do understand that Max Huntsman, one, he’s a Holocaust denier,” Villanueva informed the board. “I don’t know should you’re conscious of that. I’ve it from two separate sources.”
The editorial board capabilities independently of The Instances’ newsroom, and the interview — throughout Villanueva’s reelection marketing campaign — got here as a part of the board’s ordinary endorsement course of within the 2022 election cycle.
On the time, Huntsman wrote a letter to the Board of Supervisors, alerting them to the sheriff’s allegations and providing a response. He denied the accusation and wrote that Villanueva was “canine whistling to his extra excessive supporters that I’m German and/or Jewish and therefore un-American.”
Huntsman declined a request for additional remark Wednesday.
Esther Lim — Solis’ justice deputy — filed her personal criticism the identical week as Huntsman in 2022. Pointing to feedback the previous sheriff made on Fb livestreams, Lim alleged a sample of age discrimination and harassment of Asian girls. Lim didn’t reply to a request for remark this week.
Close to the tip of 2022, Villanueva misplaced his bid for reelection. Afterward, he mentioned, he heard nothing farther from the county in regards to the complaints or their end result till The Instances revealed an article about it this 12 months.
By that time, Villanueva was working for a spot on the Board of Supervisors — a race he misplaced within the main to the incumbent, Janice Hahn. In emails to The Instances earlier this 12 months, he known as the “Do Not Rehire” designation a “brazen try” at “electioneering.” His lawyer repeated these allegations on this week’s declare.
The declare additionally defended Villanueva’s use of the inspector normal’s full title, noting that his longer, hyphenated title is included on some public data web sites in addition to on his desk plaque. The declare didn’t tackle the previous sheriff’s description of Huntsman as a Holocaust denier.
However on the cellphone Wednesday afternoon, Villanueva and his lawyer each reiterated the allegation about Huntsman, which the previous sheriff mentioned stemmed from a prolonged investigation. “We’re assured in regards to the supply,” Villanueva mentioned, including that it was “not stunning” given Huntsman’s “household historical past.” (Beforehand, the inspector general has said that his grandfather was conscripted into the Nazi military and that the “means the Nazis functioned” did nice injury to his household. )
The previous sheriff went on to allege that the investigations into his conduct have been in retaliation for complaints he’d made to county supervisors. He and his lawyer raised questions in regards to the timing of the panel’s October choice, which got here a month after Villanueva introduced his candidacy for the Board of Supervisors.
The declare mentioned Villanueva’s “lengthy, storied profession” had been “delivered to a standstill” with out correct transparency or due course of.
Although Villanueva is not employed by the Sheriff’s Division, he informed The Instances that he feared the “Do Not Rehire” designation might hurt his capability to land different jobs in legislation enforcement. Along with the $25-million payout, he’s asking the court docket to order the designation rescinded.
He mentioned he has not but decided as as to if he would possibly run for sheriff once more.
Source link
