LANCASTER – A teenage girl who was allegedly body-slammed and called an “animal” by a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputy working as a school resource officer at Lancaster High School in 2021 won a partial victory when a judge said he will review some of the deputy’s personnel records and decide which should be turned over to her attorneys.
The plaintiff, born in 2004, is identified only as Jane Doe 1 in the Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit brought against the county, the Sheriff’s Department, Deputy Daniel Acquilano and the Antelope Valley Union High School District. The plaintiff has been identified in previous media accounts as Mikaila Robinson.
Judge Armen Tamzarian‘s ruling came during a hearing Monday, April 17, on a motion by the plaintiff’s attorneys asking that they be allowed to review Acquilano’s personnel records.
“If Acquilano has a history of targeting Black students and/or a history of excessive use of force, that information would be undoubtedly relevant in this case,” the plaintiff’s attorneys stated in their court papers.
The judge said he will inspect the deputy’s personnel records specified under his order in chambers on May 16, then decide which ones the LASD must produce to Doe’s attorneys. Among the personnel records Tamzarian will review are those involving complaints of excessive force, bias or discrimination by Acquilano; those relating to any disciplinary actions, any involving retaliatory or criminal behavior on his part; those relevant to his training in the use of force: and those pertaining to his hiring. The judge put a 10-year limit dating back from the present on each category of records.
The judge said he will not review or order the turnover of Acquilano’s entire personnel file because the request was too broad, nor will he allow production of records relating to his placement at Lancaster High because the information is irrelevant. In their court papers in opposition to the motion to produce the deputy’s records, attorneys for the county stated that Acquilano “used force against Jane Doe 1 when she refused to give him her cell phone and walked away from him at Lancaster High School.”
In her declaration, the plaintiff says she asked the deputy to cite her at the Lancaster sheriff’s station and then take her home rather than to juvenile hall.
“In response, (Deputy) Acquilano said to me, ‘You’re an animal … and you belong there,”‘ the plaintiff says. “He was referring to me belonging at juvenile hall. I believe he referred to me as an ‘animal’ and sent me, the victim, to juvenile hall because I am Black. I believe he would not call a white person an ‘animal’ and would not have sent a white teenager to juvenile hall who behaved in the same innocent manner as me.”
Although another deputy opposed taking the plaintiff to juvenile hall, Acquilano instructed a colleague to drive for two hours to Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall in Sylmar, where she was “booked and put in a jail cell until my mom came to pick me up later in the evening,” the plaintiff says. Attorneys for the county and the district deny any liability and state that the plaintiff is not entitled to damages, according to their court papers.
The incident was recorded on video and occurred Aug. 30, 2021, when the plaintiff was 16 years old. Doe’s mother was forced to look for alternative education for her daughter through independent study because the district has not removed Acquilano from Lancaster High, the suit states.
Previous related stories:
New claims sought against LA County in deputy body slam lawsuit
Personnel records of deputy who allegedly body slammed student sought
Lawsuit filed on behalf of Lancaster High School student allegedly assaulted by deputy
8 comments for "Judge grants motion to inspect part of deputy’s personnel records"
17% of the population make up 50% of crimes…if you know ; you know.
Tim Scott says
As a white male that committed innumerable crimes without getting even a second look from cops I suggest that you should add the word “investigated” there. As in ‘17% of the population make up 50% of the investigated crimes.’
17% a little to high, more like 12-13%
Which actually makes it worse…
12% blacks makes up 38% of welfare payouts
Whites 72% make up 30% of welfare payouts
12% blacks make up 38% of tax payer subsidized housing and 40% of domestic violence cases.
Make no mistake, this is right where the democrats want them especially when it comes to the welfare and tax payer subsidized housing stats.
Same people all the time. It is time to start asking the question.
Tim Scott says
“The judge said he will inspect the deputy’s personnel records specified under his order in chambers on May 16.”
I’d give odds the county settles before May 16th.
Tim Scott says
In their court papers in opposition to the motion to produce the deputy’s records, attorneys for the county stated that Acquilano “used force against Jane Doe 1 when she refused to give him her cell phone and walked away from him at Lancaster High School.”
The county’s own lawyers make the case. He used force. Was he at risk? No. Was there any indication that the public was at risk? No. Was he making an arrest and the suspect resisted? No. Was there any crime committed that would justify the detaining of a suspect? No.
For the county attorneys to make such a bone headed statement they must really be scrambling about trying to keep his records away from the court.
She didn’t comply. Simple. He asked for the phone, she didn’t give the phone to the proper authorities. She also has many “thoughts” on how he would not have done this to a white student. This might be true because the white student more likely than not would have complied. It just what actually happens in real life. Young lady needs to learn this lesson now instead of later.
Tim Scott says
“Proper authorities” don’t just make up “I get to tell you what to do and you do it” demands out of thin air. He had exactly as much authority to demand that she hand over her phone as he would have if he had ordered her to drop her pants, which is none.
So he gave her an order he had no right to give, and she didn’t comply, and all the baton polishers are just shrugging and saying that she should have. My question is, how far does your badge licker groveling extend? You seem fine with “cops can just randomly demand your property.” Would you be okay if they were demanding sex? Cash? You obviously don’t care if their demands are legal or not. Do you have a limit?