Los Angeles Sexual Assault Lawyer Blog

The 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has made a decisive ruling with regard to romantic relationships between prisoners and guards.

Los Angeles Sexual Assault Lawyers had been closely watching the case, although it involved an Idaho prisoner. The rulings of the federal 9th Circuit court are applicable to California and several other Western states.

The question at hand was whether a prisoner had the right to file a civil sexual harassment lawsuit against a guard with whom he or she had previously been romantically involved.

The appellate court in a 3-0 ruling determined that the "enormous" imbalance of power between a prisoner and his or her keeper is such that any sexual relationship calls into question the issue of consent. In fact, it becomes incredibly difficult to discern between consent and coercion in such cases.

Therefore, the court ruled that any romantic or sexual relationship between guards and prisoners must automatically be viewed as harassment, unless proven otherwise. Furthermore, the court determined that such a relationship, even if consensual, should be viewed similar to the way we view sexual relationships between adults and minors. There is the presumption, and indeed in some cases the mandatory application, of guilt upon the party with the power in the relationship, regardless of whether the other person willfully submitted to sexual contact or sexual conduct.

Consequently, the court ruled the inmate can proceed with the case. He had alleged that a female guard groped him in a sexual manner when he attempted to break up with her. They reportedly had a romantic, but not sexual, relationship. She reportedly also subjected him to aggressive and sexual pat-downs. A district court had earlier ruled that the two incidents in which the guard touched the prisoner were consensual because the romantic relationship between the two had not clearly ended.

This is an important ruling because we know that sexual abuse within prisons is a major problem. Some take the view that it is what prisoners deserve. However, no U.S. court would sanction the sexual abuse of a prisoner as punishment for some other crime.

There are approximately 2.3 million Americans who are currently incarcerated, with California housing the most - about 175, 000. About 7 percent of those are female, though as this case shows, harassment is not solely a male crime.

A recent report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that about 4.5 percent of state and federal prisoners reported being sexually victimized within the last year. That is about 1 in every 20. We are encouraged that the appellate court has taken a hard line in addressing the issue.

Cases in which someone uses their position of power are commonplace and may involve either sexual harassment or a criminal sex offense. Prison guards, police officers, probation officers, immigration agents, teachers and other adults in a position of authority can face additional consequences when found guilty of using such a position to take sexual advantage of a subordinate.

Continue reading "9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals: Inmate-Guard Sex is Presumed Harassment" »

Within the last 50 years, women have made amazing strides in terms of shattering the glass ceilings that prevented them from entering certain male-dominated fields, let alone excelling within them.

But our Los Angeles Sexual Assault Lawyers know we still have a long way to go, as evidenced most recently by lawsuits filed by female police officers against the city and chief in Arroyo Grande.

Of the three complainants, one is the department's 2002 Officer of the Year.

According to the women, they had suffered ongoing offensive and demeaning remarks from a fellow officer. When they took their complaints to the chief, he did not discipline the offending officer. Instead, he offered him a full retirement with no disciplinary action.

Although failure to discipline definitely sends a clear message of where this agency's priorities lie, it might have all ended there - had the city and the chief not in turn retaliated against the female officers who had initially complained.

After the offending officer left the agency, the mayor called a mandatory department meeting. At that meeting, he reportedly dressed the women down for making allegations he suspected were a "misunderstanding," and which he expected to be cleared up.

Now first of all, it's important to note that California law prohibits a mayor and council members from directly advising or supervising city employees, other than the city manager and the city attorney. But secondly, such statements not only serve to invalidate the women's claims, they are a clear act of hostility.

When the women went back to the chief, requesting that he address the remarks, he allegedly refused.

This may not be surprising, considering that the chief reportedly has a history of problems with sexual harassment. Local news reports indicate that about a decade ago, when the chief was serving at a department in Colorado, several female officers complained to him about sexual harassment they were suffering. But instead of addressing it head on, he reportedly took various actions against the complainants. As a result, the city settled two lawsuits out of court for a total of $72,500. Background checks performed on the chief prior to his being hired at Arroyo Grande failed to turn up evidence of the past case.

But the chief's actions in the most recent case don't end there. The complaints also allege that male officers were favored for promotions over more qualified female officers. Additionally, male officers practicing at the shooting range were given the courtesy of being allowed to shoot in their t-shirts, while female officers were required to wear vests and uniform tops. Plus, female officers were made to undergo regular "grooming checks," whereas male officers were not.

While the city has denied allegations of biased treatment, at least one of the lawsuits is moving forward and is expected to be heard sometime early next year. Two of the three women are still employed at the agency, though they are currently on medical leave for work-related injuries.

We understand how incredibly difficult it can be for a police officer to allege they have been a victim. But at the end of the day, seeking justice is often necessary to effect change.

Continue reading "Female Police Officers in California Allege Sexual Harassment, Retaliation" »

A male model is suing a clothing chain giant and an agent, after he says he was taken advantage of during a photo shoot last year.

Los Angeles Sexual Assault Lawyers understand that the victim in this case didn't initially recognize the actions as sexual harassment. This was the cause for the delay in reporting the incident, which involved a directive for him to strip naked and masturbate in order that he might appear "more relaxed" for the photo session.

He just knew that it made him uncomfortable. He knew he felt taken advantage of. But no one had touched him or physically forced him to do anything, so he felt ashamed and internalized the blame.

This is not uncommon for sexual harassment victims. They want to believe that they are somehow misinterpreting what is happening or that perhaps they are overreacting. They may recognize a behavior or pattern of behaviors as inappropriate, but they may not necessarily categorize it as sexual harassment.

Of course, there is no cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all picture of what sexual harassment is. Legally, though, it's defined as:

Unwelcome visual, verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is either pervasive or severe and affects the work conditions or establishes a hostile work environment.

It's a fairly broad definition, and it involves everything from comments about clothing to leering at someone to displaying overtly sexual posters or screensavers. And of course, it includes unwanted physical touching and sexual propositions. An instruction to masturbate in front of a superior without question falls into the realm of sexual harassment.

According to the 41-page complaint, the model reportedly was employed by Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister Co. Of course, this is a company that has become quite famous for its racy marketing, which often showcases models that are scantily clad.

This may have made the photographer's request initially seem less outrageous than it might have otherwise. While the photographer wasn't directly employed by the clothier, he was highly recommended by the company. The 18-year-old model was reportedly encouraged to work with him in order to bolster his photo portfolio.

The photographer told the model that he had tried various methods in order to have models get a certain "look" for the camera. This "look," the photographer insisted, was what was required by all of the major modeling agencies.These methods he employed included plying them with alcohol, even though they were underage. But he indicated that the most effective method was masturbation, capturing their expressions just prior to orgasm.

The photographer further told him that if he did not submit to this demand, the representatives of Abercrombie would be "mad" at him. according to the allegations. The model said he was confused and worried that he would not advance in the industry if he did not follow this directive.

Following the shoot, the model claims that the photographer exposed himself, saying he wanted to compare members.

Again, this all seems like outrageous behavior, but in context of what was happening and the industry in which it occurred, it is not a stretch to believe that the model did not understand what was happening at the time - or his rights.

The model is seeking more than $1 million for fraud, deceit, sexual harassment, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligent supervision and infliction of emotional distress.

Continue reading "Clothing Retailer Facing Alarming Sex Harassment Claims" »

A large electronics store settled a sexual harassment case for roughly $2.5 million, after an employee complained that her assistant manager was relentless in his unwanted advances, and her direct boss fired her for reporting it.

Los Angeles Sexual Assault Lawyers view this case as somewhat unique in that it was not the accuser, but the messenger, who was essentially singled out by management.

What this illustrates is that victims of sexual harassment aren't the only ones who may become ensnared in what can be an ugly battle to suppress the truth and avoid a controversy. Retaliation is defined as any attempt to fire, demote, harass or take other negative action against someone because he or she has filed a complaint of sexual harassment or because they alerted management to a complaint. It encompasses every aspect of the job, including termination, pay, promotions, job assignments, training, layoffs, fringe benefits or any other condition of employment.

In this case, however, Fry's Electronics, a California-based company, was harshly chastised by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which said that the company had gone to extensive lengths not only to silence the complainants, but also to destroy and withhold evidence. The company also reportedly employed abusive stall tactics that included filing numerous motions that were frivolous and without merit.

The company, which has more than 14,000 employees in stores across the country, vehemently denies it has done anything wrong.

Maybe you can decide for yourself. Here are the facts of the case, as reported by the Los Angeles Times:

A 20-year-old sales associate reported being uncomfortable, overwhelmed and stressed out by communication that her assistant manager was initiating. The assistant manager was said to have been incessantly calling and texting the junior worker. The text messages included commentary on her body, propositions for sex and invitations to join him at his home for drinks.

The younger worker expressed her distress to her direct supervisor. This was an individual who had reportedly obtained exceedingly positive remarks during his performance reviews. There had been no issues whatsoever regarding his job performance. That is, until he reported this issue to the company's legal department.

Within weeks, he was fired. He was told that it was due to a decline in his performance. It does not appear any negative action was taken against the female sales assistant, though one could argue that the action against the one person who spoke up on her behalf has a chilling effect on future complaints.

The assistant manager was allowed to stay, and it appears was never sanctioned.

Fry's says that it handled the situation appropriately. And although it says that it only settled in order to avoid a protracted legal battle, the court also fined it $100,000 for its handling of the case and abuses with regard to attempting to hide and destroy evidence.

In addition to the financial penalties, Fry's will also have to implement a three-year program to educate employees and supervisors on sexual harassment and on appropriate handling such incidents and complaints.

Continue reading "Electronics Store Settles Sex Harassment Case for $2.5 Million" »