Former Los Angeles Instances reporter Maya Lau filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday towards Los Angeles County, former Sheriff Alex Villanueva, a former undersheriff and a former detective, alleging {that a} legal investigation into her actions as a journalist violated her 1st Modification rights.
The go well with comes lower than a yr after a Instances article revealed that Lau had been the goal of an L.A. County Sheriff’s Division investigation that “was designed to intimidate and punish Lau for her reporting” a couple of leaked listing of deputies with a historical past of misconduct, Lau’s attorneys alleged in an emailed assertion.
Lau’s lawsuit seeks unspecified damages to compensate her for alleged violations of her dignity and privateness, in addition to the “steady accidents” and anxiousness she says within the grievance that she has confronted within the wake of the revelation she had been investigated.
The go well with particulars “six completely different counts of violating Ms. Lau’s rights beneath the U.S. structure and California state legislation, together with retaliation and civil conspiracy to disclaim constitutional rights,” in keeping with the assertion by Lau’s attorneys.
“It’s an absolute outrage that the Sheriff’s Division would criminally examine a journalist for doing her job,” Lau stated within the assertion. “I’m bringing this lawsuit not only for my very own sake, however to ship a transparent sign within the identify of reporters in all places: we is not going to be intimidated. The Sheriff’s Division must know that these sorts of ways towards journalists are unlawful.”
The Sheriff’s Division stated in an emailed assertion that it had “not been formally served with this lawsuit” by late Tuesday afternoon.
“Whereas these allegations stem from a previous administration, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Division beneath Sheriff Robert G. Luna is firmly dedicated to upholding the Structure, together with the First Modification,” the assertion stated. “We respect the very important position journalists play in holding businesses accountable and imagine within the public’s proper to a free and impartial press.”
Villanueva stated through e mail that he had not but reviewed the grievance in full and that “beneath the recommendation of counsel, I don’t touch upon pending litigation.”
“What I can say is the investigation in query, like all investigations carried out by the Public Corruption Unit throughout my tenure as Sheriff of Los Angeles County, had been based mostly on info that had been offered to the Workplace of the Legal professional Basic,” he stated. “It’s the political institution, of which the LA Instances is part, that needs to sit back lawful investigations and legal accountability with frivolous lawsuits corresponding to this one.”
A spokesperson for the county counsel’s workplace declined to remark additional. The opposite defendants within the lawsuit, former Undersheriff Tim Murakami and former Det. Mark Lillienfeld, didn’t reply to requests for remark Tuesday afternoon.
In December 2017, The Instances revealed an article by Lau a couple of listing of about 300 drawback deputies. A prolonged case file reviewed by The Instances final yr discovered that division investigators launched an preliminary inquiry into who offered Lau with the listing. The company’s investigation started when Jim McDonnell was sheriff in 2017. The Sheriff’s Division finally dropped the investigation with out referring it for prosecution after, as Lau’s grievance says, it “turned up no proof connecting Ms. Lau to any crime.”
The case file reviewed by The Instances final yr said that, after Villanueva grew to become sheriff in 2018, he revived the investigation into Lau, which the grievance alleges was a part of an “illegal conspiracy” carried out as a part of a coverage of “retaliatory legal fees towards perceived opponents of LASD.”
Lillienfeld led the investigation, and Villanueva “delegated to Undersheriff Murakami his decision-making authority” within the probe, which Murakami finally referred to the state lawyer common’s workplace for prosecution, Lau’s grievance says. In Could 2024, the workplace declined to prosecute her, citing inadequate proof.
However Lau alleges that the harm was already achieved and that her rights beneath the first Modification and California’s Structure had been violated. “If LASD’s actions are left unredressed,” in keeping with the grievance, “journalists in Los Angeles shall be chilled from reporting on issues of public concern out of worry that they are going to be investigated and prosecuted.”
The Sheriff’s Division informed The Instances final yr that its investigation of Lau was closed and that the division beneath Luna doesn’t monitor journalists.
David Snyder, govt director of the First Modification Coalition, a nonprofit free speech and press freedom advocacy group, informed The Instances final yr that reporting on leaked supplies involving a matter of public concern is often “protected beneath the first Modification” even when a reporter is conscious they had been obtained illegally.
“You’re not approved to interrupt right into a file cupboard to get data. You’re not approved to hack computer systems. However receiving info that someone else obtained unlawfully is just not a criminal offense,” Snyder stated.
The saga of the leaked data started in 2014 when Diana Teran compiled an inventory of deputies with histories of disciplinary issues. Teran was working for the county Workplace of Unbiased Evaluate, which carried out oversight of the Sheriff’s Division till it closed down that July.
In 2015, Teran was employed by the Sheriff’s Division to serve in an inside watchdog position. In 2017, in keeping with the investigative file reviewed by The Instances final yr, she heard that Instances reporters together with Lau had been asking questions concerning the listing.
After investigating additional and studying that the reporters had requested about particular particulars that matched her 2014 listing, she grew fearful that it had been leaked.
On Dec. 8, 2017, The Instances ran an investigation by Lau and two different reporters that described a few of the misconduct detailed within the listing, together with planting proof, falsifying data and sexual assault. A few of the deputies on the listing, the reporters discovered, had saved their jobs or been promoted.
Sheriff’s investigators interviewed Teran and different division officers who all denied leaking the listing. The investigation was dropped earlier than Villanueva grew to become sheriff in November 2018.
A number of months later, Lillienfeld was assigned to research allegations that Teran and different oversight officers had illegally accessed division personnel data, reopening the probe into the leaked listing.
Lillienfeld’s inquiry produced an 80-page report that was a part of the case file reviewed by The Instances final yr. It detailed potential occasions when the listing may have been leaked by Teran and said that she denied doing so.
In fall 2021, Murakami despatched the 300-page case file — which recognized Lau, Teran, L.A. County Inspector Basic Max Huntsman, an assistant to Teran and an lawyer in Huntsman’s workplace as suspects — to California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta. There was no possible trigger to prosecute Lau, in keeping with the grievance.
“Undersheriff Murakami alleged that Ms. Lau had engaged in conspiracy, theft of presidency property, illegal entry of a pc, housebreaking, and receiving stolen property,” the grievance says. “Ms. Lau didn’t commit any of those crimes.”
Bonta declined to prosecute the case.
“The retaliatory investigation towards Ms. Lau is one instance of how Alex Villanueva used the LASD to focus on and harass his political opponents,” stated Justin Hill, an lawyer at Loevy & Loevy representing Lau. “Our communities undergo when governmental leaders attempt to silence journalists and different people who maintain these leaders accountable. This lawsuit seeks to reaffirm the protected position that journalism performs in our society.”
