San Mateo County should know who Sarah Gatliff is, Her mother Sandra Lee Harmon R.I.P. was shot at 14 times struck 8 times and struck 3 times all fatal in the Back with hollow point bullets. Sheriff Bolanos never told the public she was fired at and struck in the back while she was UNARMED.
Supervisor President David Canepa has No questions or concerns about that. He endorses Sheriff Bolanos for Re-Election.
Sarah is in court next week October 27, 2021 at 1PM access is listed below. SMC Attorneys say a daughter has to prove standing, good guys and gals.
Court Appearances: Adva nced notice is required of counsel or parties who wish to be identified by the court as making an appearance or will be participating in the argument at the hearing. A list of names and emails must be sent to the CRD at firstname.lastname@example.org no later than Friday, October 22nd, 2021, by no later than 10:00AM.
General Order 58. Persons granted access to court proceedings held by telephone or videoconference are reminded that photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings, including screenshots or other visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited.
Great work Half Moon Bay City Council and Resident David Eblovi, Thank You for leading the entire County in Law Enforcement reform. If it turns out that the only resistance is from Sheriff Bolanos and San Mateo County Counsel David Silberman don’t worry both of those obstacles can be gone with the election of Mark Melville for Sheriff in 2022. That’s 18 months from now.
“It’s my understanding their ordinance will have no legal basis on our services, nor on the contract,” Bolanos said. “It’s basically unenforceable.”
Sheriff Carlos G. Bolanos finds those restrictions “problematic” and unenforceable.
Even if the ordinance is approved by the council, it likely wouldn’t have any bearing on the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, said Sheriff Carlos Bolanos. Because of the county’s contract with Half Moon Bay, the city can’t legislate changes until the contract is up for renegotiation, Bolanos said. The Sheriff’s Office’s contract with the city doesn’t expire until July 2022
How difficult could it possibly be, HMB has only 2 Deputies on duty per shift.
The proposed ordinance, which was co-written by councilmembers Harvey Rarback and Joaquin Jimenez with the help of resident David Eblovi, states that a law enforcement officer could not stop a car for failing to signal a turn, having expired license tags, or having a defective tail light. In terms of restraining suspects, the ordinance would ban the use of Tasers, chokeholds and prohibit officers from placing people in a prone position while handcuffed. It would require them to be moved on their side immediately if necessary.
The ordinance would also mandate that when dealing with someone who is a threat to themselves or others, officers must wait for backup from another officer or a mental health professional before initiating contact. In addition, officers would also be required to retreat and take cover before firing at an individual. Jimenez noted that public input on this ordinance should be encouraged and that dialogue with law enforcement would be key to making substantial changes happen.
“It’s in our best interest to listen to our community, to see what is going on and if there has to be any kind of changes to make our community safer,” Jimenez said.
While this ordinance would restrict the actions of law enforcement, Rarback believes it would instead give deputies
ORDINANCE NO. C-2021-_______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY
CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 2.33, SPECIFIC POLICING POLICIES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF HALF MOON BAY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
(a) The municipal code of the City of Half Moon Bay requires periodic updates to reflect current information and changes in law, to provide clarification to the community, and to provide for improved customer service and administration of City business.
(b) Setting a clear understanding for the behavior of law enforcement and peace officers serving the Half Moon Bay community is critical to building and maintaining trust between the community and the City’s law enforcement providers.
(c) Protecting law enforcement officers and the community from undue risk of harm as a result of unnecessary interactions or escalations between armed officers and the public is critical to protecting the public safety of all of Half Moon Bay’s residents, and especially those who may be at statistically high risk of a negative outcome due to mental illness, substance abuse issues, race, housing status, or immigration status.
(d) There is no statutory requirement that the City of Half Moon Bay enforce California Vehicle Code. Therefore the City may, and should, selectively enforce CA Vehicle Code if it results in less pervasive fear or a better standard of living for its people.
(e) It is in the interests of the City of Half Moon Bay for peace officers to have operable and operating video and sound recording devices at all times that they are in public or are engaging in policing activities.
(f) A significant portion of the at-risk population of Half Moon Bay lives in reasonable fear of encounters with law enforcement providers. These fears are justified by the fact that the current law enforcement agency serving greater Half Moon Bay has had numerous recent fatal encounters with individuals who suffered from mental health issues. Therefore, it is in the interests of the public and the officers who serve here to minimize the number and types of such interactions, and when interactions do occur for the City to insure that the interests of all parties are protected to the extent possible.
Section 2. Municipal Code Update (Specific Policing Policies) including revisions to Chapter 2.33 of the Half Moon Bay Municipal Code is adopted as set forth in Exhibit “A” to this Ordinance shown for introduction as deletions in strike through and additions in underline.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council herby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and adopted this Ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk of the City of Half Moon Bay is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance, or the title hereof as a summary, pursuant to Government Code Section 36933, once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Half Moon Bay Review, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Half Moon Bay.
Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth (30th) day from and after its final passage.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay, California,
Held on the 18th day of May, 2021, by the following vote: Ayes, Councilmembers: __________________________________ Noes, Councilmembers: __________________________________ Absent, Councilmembers: __________________________________ Abstain, Councilmembers: __________________________________ ATTEST: ___________________________ _______________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Robert Brownstone, Mayor
May 14, 2020 Mark Simon wrote an article titled “An unusual Harbor District Meeting” the typical Victim Shaming piece which is something he is quite skilled at. This article is about a SMCHD meeting that took place 29 days prior to his article. He has joined Congresswoman Jackie Speiers Daughter Stephanie Sierra of ABC 7/KGO in the Victim Shaming plan of attack. Also on the TEAM is Supervisor Don Horsley, Assemblyman Kevin Mullin (Mark Simon’s partner) I can’t wait to discover who is the Captain of this TEAM and who is responsible for forming it.
I would suggest Mark Simon consider the May 26, 2015 as an unusual meeting it was very exciting and I know he attended I just don’t know why?At the time he worked for SamTrans.
First of all this April 15, 2020 meeting was not unusual for the Harbor District, I’m not sure how many meetings Mr. Simon has actually attended I have attended several and the yelling and cutting each other off especially Virginia Chang Kiraly to Sabrina Brenna is normal Virginia doesn’t like Sabrina similar to how Mark Simon feels about her.
Mark Simon who supports the Perpetrator says Her vehicle for this behavior was a long-standing dispute with fellow Commissioner Tom Mattusch, who in 2014 foolishly circulated some raw pornography to about 40 people. Mark doesn’t mention the Invitation for all expense paid Safari trip Tom Mattusch offered Sabrina.
So it’s Not ok with Mark Simon for Victim Sabrina Brennan to speak about female genitalia but is ok to mail unwelcome porn, which is exactly what Commissioner Tom Mattuschsent her and all the other Commissioners, Supervisor Don Horsley, Assemblyman Mullin, Mark Simon, and Stephanie Sierra ABC 7/KGO are cool with that. Together they want/wish Sabrina Brennan to just SHUT UP, Move On. That is the same that all Child Molesters (SMC Dr. William Ayers) and their Enablers want/wish of their Victims.
John Ullom at 29:20 Mark He and brother Dan own Citizen Access TV, somebody stole his broadcasting device, They were broadcasting the meeting live for FREE. Somebody didn’t want that to happen.
The true picture of Mark Simon, a Loud & Vile Bully, Victim Shaming/Basher.
As a Private Victims Advocate for the last 22 years in San Mateo County I find the way to get a victim to stop talking about a subject is to deal with it Honestly in the first place. Victim Shaming, and telling the Victim to Shut up is a guarantee that you will hear about it at Every Single Meeting.
“I will continue bringing up my harassment at these meetings,” she said. “I won’t be silenced.” Sabrina Brennan.
Real Estate Investor Clyde Berg Supports Silicon Valley Journalism & Media Projects
Handshake Deal Brings Investigative Reporting to Silicon Valley’s Family Courts
CUPERTINO, CA—In a signature handshake deal, driven in part by Santa Clara County’s District Attorney Jeff Rosen’s recent refusal to prosecute another rape case, California real estate investor Clyde Berg has lent support to Bassi Productions for a collaborative project that strives to infuse substantial funding and investment to journalism, local investigative reporting and production projects that seek to bring media attention to Silicon Valley’s most shocking divorce and custody cases.
Historically, the wealth of Clyde Berg, and his activist billionaire brother Carl Berg, has attracted some of Silicon Valley’s most nefarious criminals and scam artists, yet Clyde Berg contends what attorney Bradford Baugh did while representing his former wife in a divorce case was the most elaborate legal scam of all.
As part of an alleged scam, Bradford Baugh partnered with fellow divorce lawyer Sharon Roper, who drafted a bogus post-nuptial agreement that was later determined to have been forged a year before Berg’s wife filed for divorce and made false allegations of sexual assault and domestic violence. Had Berg not challenged the forged agreement and false sexual assault claims during a divorce and related civil case, Ellena may have succeeded in fraudulently obtaining $10 million dollars from Berg’s estate. Ultimately, Clyde was exonerated of all charges and obtained a rarely issued formal “finding of factual innocence”, meaning the crimes Ellena had alleged, and garnered media attention from, never happened, and Clyde, at 73 years of age, should never have been criminally prosecuted based on false claims.
Susan Bassi, a local publisher and court watchdog who experienced her own seven-year divorce case in Santa Clara County, met Clyde Berg on social media after she had facilitated bringing national media attention to the domestic violence and custody case involving Kendra Scott and former San Francisco 49er Ray McDonald. Bassi was especially struck by Berg’s compassion to believe women like Kendra and Neha Rastogi, a former Apple manager who suffered years of abuse at the hands of her powerful immigrant CEO husband, Abhishek Gattani during their 10-year marriage.
Bassi and Berg are united in their criticism of DA Jeff Rosen. Bassi has publicly argued that Rosen has failed victims and wasted taxpayer money by maliciously prosecuting men like Berg, while giving men including McDonald and Gattani a free pass.
For the past five years, Bassi has been pushing local and national news outlets to cover family court cases, where court files are fraught with horror stories that include shocking details involving domestic violence, tax evasion, sexual assault, child abuse, rape, and fraud , all of which are typically ignored by law enforcement agencies and judges.
Mainstream media outlets historically have steered clear of investigating divorce and family court scandals, as it can be virtually impossible to sort out the “he said, she said” allegations that characterize these cases. The Berg-Bassi collaboration will seek to provide support for local reporting and production projects with added support requested from the 49ers, the Oakland A’s as well as tech and social media companies including; Apple, Google, 23andMe, Yahoo, LinkedIn, Oracle, Facebook, and Netflix where employees, investors and founders have been personally impacted by unethical private and government lawyers seeking to misuse the courts and incite conflict in families for profit.
“We live in Silicon Valley where stories arising from family courts should fill local newspapers and provide production content to an area quickly becoming known as Hollywood North. Silicon Valley has the money, drive and technology to support journalism and investigative reporting to watchdog elected officials and court systems. Justice is never served when the media isn’t watching, ” Bassi stated as the collaborative project was announced.
Berg’s support, combined with the support of other tech and social media companies, will allow Bassi Productions to direct funding to journalism projects, social media storytelling and non-profit organizations committed to social justice and bringing much needed transparency to California’s family courts and law enforcement agencies dealing with intimate partner violence, sexual assault and false claims made during divorce and custody cases.
To share a family court story, apply for grants, or to assist in project funding and support, contact: Bassiproductions.com, P.O. Box 2220 Los Gatos, CA 95031, or (831) 320-6421.
Wait for it….. wait for it! There it is, District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s pass for the Redwood City police officers responsible for the August 2018 death of 55 year old Ramsey Saad, the 2nd of three such deaths, under similar circumstances, at the hands of San Mateo County officers, this year.
Slight of hand
In an apparent slight of hand, Wagstaffe released his decision not to charge the officers involved, by way of a proxy, Redwood City Police Chief Dan Mulholland -with his (Wagstaffe) providing a six-page letter stating no charges would be filled, and Mulholland, in-turn, conveniently passing it on to the press.
Redwood City Police Chief Mulholland
This letter was given to Mulholland, on the eve of the November 2018 election, immediately before the weekend. Undoubtedly cognizant of press cycles, Wagstaffe had timed the disclosure, to limit media exposure and public attention.
Wagstaffe’s findings can not be relied upon
Wagstaffe’s decision was never in doubt, it was foregone, and only a matter of timing its announcement. The disclosure was artful and designed to provide the appearance of a thoughtful measured process. Bravo, Steve!
The results of Wagstaffe’s review were predictable, could be foreseen, and will most certainly be repeated. From district attorney to the district’s chief enabler, covering for institutional, organizational, and executive misconduct / corruption. Defending the indefensible, the district attorney’s office is clearly open for business, for the politically connected.
No checks & balances
Steve projects confidence, obviously believing he can sell snake oil to anyone or, another analogy, sell ice to eskimos. And he has a right to this belief, to a certain degree, for he has no credible adversaries, no persons to keep him in check. The County has a private defenders program, versus a public defenders office-the only one in the state (of 58 counties).
The significance is the private defenders program, historically, assigns cases through a panel to obedient attorney’s, ones who sell / market pleas to defendants, rarely file opposition motions or take cases to trial, and routinely, with regularity, funnel clients to state prison, county jail, and probation. Just look at the District Attorney’s conviction rate (win-loss record), it’s to die for -is the envy of other bay area counties.
This relationship between prosecution and defense has also dulled the senses and oversight of the County’s judiciary, with judges not being challenged (by the defense, the private defender’s program) to make significant calls on the law.
The relationship between Wagstaffe and county law enforcement executives is mutually beneficial and self serving, he covers for them and, in turn, they return the favor, with their political support & acquiescence.
When officers and public officials who matter commit crimes such as domestic violence, unnecessary and excessive use of force, sex crimes, etc., the results are often managed by county law enforcement executives, with the complicity and aid of Mr. Wagstaffe, resulting in distinctly different outcomes from the general public.
Use of force resulting in death foreseen
In the instant case, officers allegedly responded to a disturbance call involving Saad, a person with known mental health issues. Rather than collaborate with his supervisor and peers and come up with a strategy to address the situation and reduce the possibility of violence / injury, Officer Poveda drove directly to the scene, contacted Saad, and became involved in a physical confrontation with him. Poveda tased Saad, twice, and shocked him multiple times. Officer Poveda, according to Wagstaffe, was eventually able to handcuff Saad and thereupon joined by three other officers (the Calvary).
According to Wagstaffe, Saad [while handcuffed] continued to struggle with the officers who had come to Poveda’s aid. Eventually one officer placed a knee [on Saad’ s back] between his shoulder blades, while the two other officers present controlled his mid-body and legs, according to Wagstaffe.
Saad died and a medical examiner from the San Mateo County coroner’s office determined the cause of death to have been “a cardiac arrest occurring during physical exertion, physical restraint and tasering”, this according to Wagstaffe’s letter.
Wagstaffe anecdotally included Saad’s height and weight, in his letter, apparently to portray him as menacing. Yet he did not include the heights and weights of the four trained Redwood City Police officers who were involved.
In tasing a person multiple times, physically struggling with him, and finally placing a knee on his back, as he lay handcuffed facedown, restricting the movement of his chest, torso and legs, is it possible his breathing had been severely diminished, causing him to die from asphyxia? Just asking, Steve.
Did you present this information to the medical examiner who conducted Saad’s autopsy, Steve? Just asking. And how much did the officer placing a knee and on Saad’s back weigh? Again, just asking.
Aren’t officers specifically trained not to lay a large handcuffed prisoner on his/her stomach, Steve? Could such acts go towards an officer’s intent, Steve? Just asking.
DA Wagstaffe as an enabler
Under the circumstances, couldn’t Saad’s death have been foreseen, Steve?
It appears, I can confidently predict what your conclusion will be, in these situations, why can’t you foresee that your actions or rather lack of action is ensuring such events will continue to occur, in San Mateo County, with, I might add, some regularity, unabated?
I submit, by continuing to give officers a pass, in such instances, DA Wagstaffe is an enabler, significantly contributing to both the cause and tragic outcome of such events.
Not an honest broker
District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe holds the public’s trust, he is supposed to be independent and an honest broker, one the public can count on to speak truth to power. Three officer use of force deaths, this year, alone, and counting, ALL involving persons of color, individuals with known mental health problems, multiple applications of a taser, and forceful positional restraint!
Come on, Steve, there’s a problem with the use of force by officers, in San Mateo County! They’re killing persons with regularity, Steve! It’s not a product liability problem, you can’t keep covering up for that which is so obvious.
Call for transparency & full disclosure
In order to establish the truth and garner public trust, I would ask DA Wagstaffe to provide a complete copy of his office’s investigative report into Saad’s death, the autopsy report, the death certificate, the computer aided dispatch (CAD) printout for the event, the involved recorded 9-1-1 call(s) involved, and the recorded Redwood City Police radio communications involved in the event.
It is believed the public’s interest, in this matter, far outweighs that of the decedent, the San Mateo County District Attorney, the Redwood City Police Department, and the San Mateo County Coroners Office. The fact that this is one of three such use of force deaths, in the county, this year, involving persons of color who suffered mental heath issues make such disclosures even more important, if the district attorney wishes to establish transparency and the public’s trust.
I had hoped I would have heard from one of you by now 6 months after writing this story about San Mateo County Sheriff Lt. K. Bell and the Redwood City Police Department ignoring the DV Protocol, after receiving a 9-1-1 DV call. Not Attested and Gun was not removed. A young child was present.
Based on the information from San Mateo County Election Office there was a total of 286,210 ballots received, of that amount 265,793 ballots tallied a total 249,288 voted either yes or no for Measure W. That also means that 16,605 votes were not tallied or didn’t vote either way for Measure W. = 6.24% of the 265,793.
With a total of 20,417 remaining ballots to be tallied, minus the 6,24% No tally or vote for Measure W average leaves 19,149 votes to be tallied. The Yes on Measure W would have to get 68.7% of the remaining ballots “and they are statistically unlikely to meet the necessary threshold”.
With that information We are calling Measure W Failed.
Total Registered Voters 399,591, 286,210 Voted = 72% Turnout
San Mateo County Elections Office should display:
Registered Voters 399,591 100.0%
Total Ballots Received (turn out) 286,210 72.0%
Vote by Mail 260,000 65.1%
Vote Center 26,210 6.7%
Total Ballots Counted 265,793 53.3%
Ballots received, damaged or challenged ##### ##.#%
Today November 21, 2018 The elections office shows a new and larger number of mail ballots that were received by 9:00PM November 9, 2018. The new number is 260,000 the previous number was 258,015. That is a 1985 ballot difference.
According to those numbers a total of 286,210 ballots have been received. When you add the 260,000 plus the 26,210 on Election Day . He is reporting that 247,256 ballots have been tallied that leaves 38,966 to be tallied.
The San Mateo Daily Journal which has a readership of 84,000 people per day has reported 12,744 ballots to be counted/tallied. Simply not true or accurate.
Measure W which has been failing consistently so far is now inching closer to pass.
Mark Church should be counting the ballots instead he takes time to write a public relations piece in the SMDJ.
From: Steve Wagstaffe Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 3:02 PM To: Bulwa, Demian Subject: RE: Jaffer story
Thank you very much. I apologize that we made the mistake we did and I appreciate your clarifying it for us.
Life is great here in San Mateo County; I hope it is going equally for you.
No Reporters have asked Deputy Lopez how he felt about that.
Case dismissed against former deputy
By Anna Schuessler Daily Journal staff
The case against a former San Mateo County sheriff’s deputy being charged for allegedly helping to smuggle cellphones and prescription drugs into county jail was dismissed Friday after a judge ruled evidence that could have showed he did not commit the crime should have been presented to a criminal grand jury.
But District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said Judge Donald Ayoob is imposing a burden on the prosecution that the law does not require. He said prosecutors informed grand jury members of letters an inmate wrote recanting his testimony connecting Juan Pablo Lopez, 54, with a cellphone involved in the case, and were not required to present them unless the jury asked to see them. He disagreed with Judge Donald Ayoob’s ruling that prosecutors had a duty to present the letters, and said prosecutors may consider refiling the case or appealing the decision.
“We feel the judge made a very serious error in his ruling,” he said. “We will assess it the coming days.”
On Dec. 16, 2015, Lopez and two county jail correctional officers, George Ismael and Michael Del Carlo, were accused of providing cellphones and drugs to inmate Dionicio Rafael Lopez Jr., who was also indicted along with Leticia Lopez, Amanda Lopez and Roxanne Ingebretsen, according to prosecutors.
On Nov. 17, the case against Del Carlo was dismissed after Ayoob granted his motion to dismiss over strenuous prosecution objection, according to prosecutors.
Once a write-in candidate for county sheriff, Lopez is also being accused of embezzlement, perjury and election fraud based on allegations he used donations from his campaign for his own personal use and lied about his city of residence, according to prosecutors.
Lopez listed his residence as being in Redwood City but allegedly was living in Newark when he filed to run for sheriff in 2014. He is also being accused of misrepresenting his address on a real estate loan, according to prosecutors.
Lopez will next appear in court Jan. 25 to set a new jury trial date for the embezzlement, perjury and election fraud charges and is out of custody on a $170,000 bail bond, according to prosecutors.
In San Mateo County a 29 year old man named Matthew Graves was sentenced to 4 years in Prison for making a phone call violating a restraining order. San Mateo County’s Historical Human Trafficking conviction.
Deputy accused of girl’s sexual assault
A detective in the L.A. County sheriff’s special victims unit is held on suspicion of raping a 14-year-old.
By Richard Winton and Maya Lau
A Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy assigned to handle sensitive sex abuse crimes, often involving vulnerable minors, has been arrested on suspicion of raping a 14-year-old girl in a case he was investigating. Neil Kimball was taken into custody Friday evening after a monthlong inquiry into the allegations by the sheriff’s criminal internal investigation bureau. He was booked on suspicion of rape by force and preventing or dissuading a victim from testifying.
The 45-year-old investigator with the special victims unit met the girl during the “scope of his work,” a department spokeswoman said Monday.
Kimball, a 20-year department veteran, has investigated dozens of child molestation cases in Los Angeles County as a member of the elite specialized unit since 2013.
“The investigation and arrest resulted from information provided to the department by a member of the public,” the Sheriff’s Department said in a statement. It did not announce the arrest Friday and provided the statement after an inquiry by The Times.
Kimball was investigated previously, after a woman told the Sheriff’s Department in February 2009 that Kimball had grabbed her hand several months earlier and tried to make her touch his genitals, according to a memo from the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office. Prosecutors ultimately declined to charge Kimball in the case.
Addressing questions about why Kimball was selected to join the Special Victims Bureau despite the 2009 investigation, the department said in a statement: “The prior allegations involving Det. Kimball were presented to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office and criminal charges were declined due to insufficient evidence. The department will conduct a review of the internal process related to Det. Kimball’s assignment at Special Victims Bureau.”
The statement also said that a review of Kimball’s prior cases is underway to ensure that there are no additional victims.
Officials said the department has not reached out to prosecutors because there are no pending cases or allegations.
News of the arrest sent a tremor through the ranks of sex crime investigators, who are normally thoroughly vetted before receiving such assignments.
Dan Scott, a retired Sheriff’s Department sergeant in the special victims unit who has investigated hundreds of child sex abuse cases, said of Friday’s arrest: “This is a shock. The unit has never had something like this happen.”
The alleged attack occurred in November 2017 in Ventura County, said Ventura County Chief Assistant Dist. Atty. Michael Schwartz, whose office has been involved in the case for the last month. L.A. County sheriff’s internal criminal affairs investigators reached out to the Ventura County office for assistance, officials said.
Kimball was relieved of duty with pay and was booked at the Los Angeles County Inmate Reception Center shortly after 11 p.m. Friday. His bail is set at $2 million.
Kimball has been away from the unit since August at a medical facility, Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman Nicole Nishida said. Kimball was at the facility when the allegation was reported Oct. 10.
A colleague at the special victims unit who took over some of his criminal investigations and contacted some of those involved learned of the accusation against Kimball, Nishida said.
“The internal criminal investigation bureau aggressively investigated the case and got a removal order for him from the facility on Friday and that is when he was arrested,” Nishida said.
Citing confidentiality laws, Nishida said she could not provide details of the type of medical facility.
Efforts to reach a representative for Kimball were unsuccessful.
Ron Hernandez, president of the Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, said his group had not been contacted by Kimball for representation.
“Any time I hear allegations of law enforcement crossing the line of their authority and trust it’s appalling, but I try to reserve my judgment until I know more details,” Hernandez said.
In the 2009 allegation, a woman and her friends were stopped by Kimball and another deputy in the parking lot of a hotel where the group was staying in August 2008, according to the memo by Deputy Dist. Atty. Deborah Escobar.
While the group of friends was being questioned by Kimball, some of the women in the group asked to use the bathroom in their hotel room, and Kimball allowed it. The deputy followed them to their room, near where the woman who later complained started filling up a Jacuzzi, according to the memo.
The woman said Kimball told her and her female friends to get into the hot tub, and some of them complied, wearing their underwear, as Kimball flirted with them, the memo said.
When Kimball used the bathroom in the group’s hotel room, the complainant went to check on him, and found the deputy exposing himself, according to the memo by Escobar. The woman said Kimball took her hand and placed it on his genitals and grabbed her buttocks, but she pulled away.
Prosecutors declined to file a charge of sexual battery against Kimball, finding no corroborating evidence of the woman’s complaint.
The witnesses in the hotel gave contradictory statements and the complainant failed to cooperate with investigators, Escobar wrote.
Scott said any previous allegations of sexual misconduct would normally exclude a person from the special victims unit.
“An investigation like this requires [that] you interview all the prior victims he came into contact with during his time there,” said Scott, who has served as a consultant on federal and county child abuse commissions. “You have to be very careful with the vetting for this unit because they come into contact with vulnerable victims.”
Times staff writer Matt Hamilton contributed to this report.