The San Benito County Board of Supervisors rejected a $1 million
claim from a private investigator who alleges several county and
city law enforcement officials defamed him.
The move by the Board also leaves it open to a lawsuit by Dennis
Stafford.
The claim, filed by investigator Stafford, alleges that District
Attorney John Sarsfield, Sheriff Curtis Hill and other law
enforcement officials are guilty of defaming Stafford’s character
during a press conference Sept. 10 at the Hollister Police
Department and at the Sheriff’s Office.
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors rejected a $1 million claim from a private investigator who alleges several county and city law enforcement officials defamed him.
The move by the Board also leaves it open to a lawsuit by Dennis Stafford.
The claim, filed by investigator Stafford, alleges that District Attorney John Sarsfield, Sheriff Curtis Hill and other law enforcement officials are guilty of defaming Stafford’s character during a press conference Sept. 10 at the Hollister Police Department and at the Sheriff’s Office.
Stafford’s second claim filed against the city alleging former Hollister Police chiefs Larry Todd and Bill Pierpoint, Capt. Bob Brooks and Sgt. Andy Burgess also participated in defaming him, was rejected by the City Council earlier this month.
The Board’s decision to reject the claim was the expected reaction to such a sizable monetary claim, County Counsel Karen Forcum said.
“It is not unusual, and the claim process is the required first step in any sort of legal action,” Forcum said.
Stafford declined to comment on the Board’s rejection of his claim as he has since he first filed it Sept. 16.
Stafford had to re-file his claim Oct. 9 because the county said it did not have a specific date of the alleged defamation, and was therefore incomplete.
In order for Stafford to file a lawsuit against the county, he first had to file a claim, according to state law.
Other county officials said the Board’s rejection of the claim should not be seen as the Board taking sides for or against Stafford’s claim.
“The Board’s rejection of the claim is very procedural in nature,” County Administrative Officer Gil Solorio said.
The rejection of the claim starts a legal clock ticking that gives Stafford up to a year to file a lawsuit against the county if he chooses.
Stafford’s two claims accuse Todd, Pierpoint, Sarsfield, Hill and other local officials of defaming his character during the press conference.
Stafford alleges in the claim that Hill and Sarsfield released “privileged and confidential information to the public without lawful authorization.”
According to the claim, Sarsfield, Hill and other officials are intentionally attempting to defame and embarrass Stafford by re-trying nearly 60 felony convictions dating back to 1984.
All of the cases Sarsfield’s office has been investigating since January were ones Stafford was involved in either as an investigator, a crime scene reconstruction expert or as an expert witness.
Stafford said in the claim he believes Sarsfield, Hill and others are part of a “civil conspiracy” to violate his constitutional and civil rights by denying him equal protection under the law.
Stafford alleges that Sarsfield and Hill’s investigations are intentionally targeting him because they are not researching cases involving other employees or investigators who were named as suspects in criminal cases.
Sarsfield has said repeatedly that his reopening of the convictions has nothing to do with any type of conspiracy or vendetta against Stafford.
“I’m doing what the law requires me to do,” Sarsfield said.
He said the state Attorney General’s office directed him to begin this investigation.
However, a spokesman for the attorney General’s Office said they did not direct Sarsfield to begin an investigation.
Stafford’s daughter also filed claims against the city and county based on the investigations having violated her privacy rights.
