Susan Shelley: The persecution of Donald J. Trump

• April 2, 2023

Arrested for corruption or corruptly arrested?

As of this writing, the former president of the United States and frontrunning GOP candidate for president in 2024, Donald J. Trump of Florida, has been indicted by a grand jury in Manhattan on charges that are still under seal as of this writing. According to some news reports, Trump will be in New York City on Tuesday to be formally charged, arrested and booked.

There’s obviously a lot of interest in the booking photo. You can expect to see it on shirts, hats, coffee cups, tote bags, posters, flags and murals on the sides of trucks. Trump supporters are ready to run with Notorious DJT.

Two days before the indictment was announced, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was on MSNBC telling host Joy Reid that “we spend too much time talking about him….We cannot keep giving him all the press he wants.”

Right, good luck with that.

Pelosi seemed to think Trump was fabricating the story when he announced on his Truth Social account that he was going to be arrested. “This whole thing about his indictment coming out when he didn’t even really know if he was going to be indicted, I don’t think,” she said. “And for a week and a half, all we hear is about him. And that’s exactly what he wanted.”

The former House speaker obviously noticed Trump’s rising popularity. Last week, a Fox News poll found that the man Pelosi sniped at as “a former, ex, impeached, twice, president, and defeated, president of the United States” had expanded his lead in the GOP primary race and was at 54%, leading Florida Governor Ron DeSantis by 30 points. In February, Trump led DeSantis 43% to 28%.

Fox News’ pollster stated that “the rumor that Trump is going to be indicted by the district attorney in Manhattan has helped him quite a bit among Republican primary voters.”

But Pelosi’s comments are cause to wonder if the rumor was also helping Trump among independents and perhaps even some Democrats.

By Thursday evening, the Trump campaign had sent out a fundraising email that featured the New York Times headline, “Grand Jury votes to indict Donald Trump in New York.” It referred to the indictment as “a disgusting witch hunt” and slammed the DA, Alvin Bragg, as a “Soros-funded District Attorney” who had “relied on the testimony of a convicted felon and a disbarred liar.”

That’s a reference to Michael Cohen, a now disbarred attorney who reportedly worked as a “fixer” for Trump, and who went to prison for lying to Congress six times. Cohen also pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations, which may be relevant. Reporters and legal experts have speculated that Bragg has taken a New York state misdemeanor related to maintaining accurate business records and enhanced it to a felony by claiming that it was tied to a federal crime, specifically a campaign finance law violation.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume the speculation has hit the nail on the head, and let’s also assume that Trump did exactly what he’s accused of doing. What is he accused of doing?

He’s accused of using his own money to pay his own lawyer to prevent public embarrassments threatened by an adult film actress and a former Playboy model. He’s accused of writing it down in the business records as “legal” expenses. And he’s accused of doing this so close to the 2016 election that it must be considered a donation to his own campaign, which should have been reported as such and wasn’t.

Even assuming this is all true, it’s questionable whether campaign finance law required these payments to be reported as donations to the Trump presidential campaign. There are many reasons why a married businessman, whose business is built on licensing his own name, would seek to prevent splashy headlines about alleged affairs with the women in question. Don’t forget that at the time, the whole known universe expected Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election. Experts in politics and polling thought Donald Trump was on his way back up the escalator to shoot promos for “The Apprentice.”

But even assuming that the payments had to be reported as donations from the candidate to the campaign and were not, is that a crime for a grand jury to spend months investigating? Calling witnesses? Issuing indictments?

Hardly. Campaigns might be fined for a reporting violation. But federal prosecutors didn’t bring any charges against Trump for campaign finance violations or anything else.

Interestingly, a federal prosecutor was working in the Manhattan district attorney’s office for a while. And this is a very strange story.

Mark Pomerantz, according to his biography on the website of Simon & Schuster, publisher of his “fascinating inside account of the attempt to prosecute Donald Trump” (list price $29.99), “was a retired lawyer living a calm suburban life when he accepted an unexpected offer to join the staff of the district attorney of New York County in February 2021 to work on the investigation of former president Donald Trump.” Oddly, this job offer came with no salary. This former federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York worked in the county district attorney’s office on the Trump case “pro bono” from February 2021 to February 2022.

Related Articles

He resigned in a huff after newly elected District Attorney Bragg, who replaced Cyrus Vance, Jr., reportedly expressed hesitancy about the evidence that supposedly justified an indictment of Trump.

And that’s when Pomerantz wrote his book, “People vs. Donald Trump.” In it, the publisher informs us, he tells “why he believes Donald Trump should be prosecuted.” The book was published two months ago.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan told Fox Business News that Bragg only decided to pursue charges against Trump after the former president announced his candidacy for 2024. “He’s leading in every single poll,” Jordan said, “so I think that’s what changed his mind.”

The Judiciary Committee is now investigating Alvin Bragg for election interference.  However, with the way Republicans are raising money on this indictment, that could turn out to be a victimless crime.

Write [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @Susan_Shelley

​ Orange County Register 

Volunteers hop to delivering Basket of Miracles to children battling illness

• April 2, 2023

The Easter Bunny is getting a little help from Miracles for Kids with brightening the day for children with life-threatening illnesses.

The Irvine-based organization will deliver 316 Easter baskets and care packages to the children and their families through its Spring Basket of Miracles program.

More than 125 volunteers have been collecting donations and filling the baskets since the start of the year. Each basket contains candy and egg decorating kits, games and puzzles, and cleaning products and hygiene items for the family.

“It’s important, especially during these uncertain economic times, to make sure that the low-income families that we serve are able to concentrate on their critically ill child and not have to worry about expenses,” said Autumn Strier, co-founder and CEO of Miracles for Kids.

Miracles for Kids also provides financial support, housing and access to counseling for families who are supporting an ill child. The nonprofit was founded in 2002.

More information can be found here.

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Proposition 22 should remain law in California so gig drivers can retain flexible schedules

• April 2, 2023

In 2020, I was proud to be one of the nearly 10 million California voters who cast their ballots in support of Proposition 22. As a long time app-based driver, I worked  hard to help educate my friends and families about the importance of being an independent worker, something that provides the flexibility I really need as a working mom. The measure gained the support of almost 60 percent of voters and protected my right to remain an independent contractor while gaining meaningful income as an app-based driver. Not only did Prop. 22 ensure that I can choose my own hours and maintain flexibility that works for me, but it also assured that I get new benefits, a healthcare stipend and guaranteed earnings.

Despite overwhelming voter support, special interests who opposed the initiative back in 2020 immediately took the measure to court, attempting to overturn the law with blatant disregard for millions of Californians and for drivers like me who want to remain independent.

Thankfully, an appellate court saw through this special interest effort and ruled to uphold the core principles of Prop. 22. I won’t be surprised if opponents try to find other avenues to overturn our independent status, but I’m hopeful those efforts are swiftly stopped in their tracks. The voters have spoken, drivers have spoken and the court has spoken. Enough is enough.

As an app-based driver, the recent decision from the California Court of Appeal was a huge relief.

App-based work has been an invaluable resource helping me make ends and provide for my family while I pursue my passions. As a film producer and director, my projects can be irregular and I often have unpredictable days that wouldn’t allow me to have a traditional job while being able to build my own business. When projects are slowing down, I have the comfort of knowing I can work extra hours driving to help bring in needed income. And when my plate is full at work, I know I can take a few hours driving here and there without any pressure. An added bonus is that as a working mom, I have the flexibility to care for a two-year-old, helping to save on what would otherwise be costly childcare.

Related Articles

With rising costs of living, economic uncertainty on the horizon and lingering impacts that COVID had on my industry, independent driver status is more important to me than ever. Plus, Prop. 22 ensures guaranteed earnings and important other benefits like access to a health insurance stipend that we didn’t have before the law was passed.

Those against Prop. 22 aren’t representing what’s best for hundreds of thousands of drivers like me. In fact, eighty-eight percent of drivers surveyed in 2021 said that Prop. 22 has been good for them. They, like me, love being their own boss by working when they want and how they want —with Prop. 22 benefits that help my family. Eighty-seven percent of drivers also believe Prop. 22 “should be protected by the courts.”

I’ve met countless drivers in my efforts to uphold Prop. 22 who feel just like I do and who are committed to ensuring Prop. 22 stays the law of the land. I hope that our elected officials, courts and most importantly – the people – understand that any attempt to undo independent contract status for app-based drivers is a direct affront to voters, drivers, and the very democracy that we live in.

Alexsyia Flora is a Lyft driver in Los Angeles.

​ Orange County Register 

How law schools can restore free speech and why they must

• April 2, 2023

Freedom of speech has long been considered the sine qua non of the American experiment. But the First Amendment is worth little more than the parchment it’s written on without the support of lawyers. That’s what makes the latest episode at Stanford Law so concerning, and why law schools across the country must be vigilant in defending First Amendment values.

Last month, a group of boisterous law students at Stanford disrupted a school-sponsored event in which Judge Kyle Duncan of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals was invited to give remarks. Upset at his supposed denial of the existence of transgender women, the student protesters “jeered at every third word” in “a staged public shaming.” When Judge Duncan asked whether any administrators were present to tame the situation, Tirien Steinbach — Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion — joined the fray, asking whether “the juice was worth the squeeze” and shaming the judge for “tearing the fabric of this community.”

But it isn’t Ms. Steinbach’s intolerance that’s most troubling. It’s the rank hostility towards free speech demonstrated by Stanford Law’s student body, whose outburst is reflective of a broader trend among law students. Indeed, from San Francisco to New Haven, similar episodes have transpired. Certainly, the First Amendment remains strong in a legal or doctrinal sense; today’s judges by and large remain committed to free speech. But that does not guarantee tomorrow’s will be similarly dedicated, and if these incidents are any indication, there are rough days ahead for the First Amendment.

Constitutional rights aren’t worth anything when the legal profession loses the will to defend them. Legal scholar John Langbein once observed that “our guarantee of routine jury trial is a fraud” — its enshrinement in the Sixth Amendment notwithstanding — “because legal professionals … preferred the convenience of doing [plea] deals to the rigor of trying cases.” And sure enough, despite our Founders’ promise to the contrary, only 2% of federal criminal defendants even demand juries anymore. The fear is that a similar fate awaits the First Amendment’s freedom of speech, but law schools have the tools at their disposal to stop it.

First, law schools must forcefully discipline students found to have infringed the free speech or associational rights of their classmates. Law students will be far less likely to materially disrupt events if they have reason to expect adverse consequences, whether that be loss of privileges (e.g., participation in law journals or clinics) or suspension and even expulsion in extreme instances of misconduct.

Second, law schools should add First Amendment law to their first-year curriculum or otherwise make it required. Basic classes in constitutional law do little more than pay lip service to freedom of speech, leaving students tragically uninformed of one of their (and their classmate’s) most valuable constitutional rights. Thus, after the Stanford episode, some student disrupters ironically attempted to justify their behavior as itself an exercise of free speech. Of course, the First Amendment does notprotect hecklers’ vetoes, the Supreme Court having held that hostile mobs are no excuse for the government to shut down speakers. A little knowledge of First Amendment law could go a long way in taming the passions of students, like Stanford’s, who think they are constitutionally entitled to deprive their classmates of free speech. Ignorance may sometimes be bliss, but ignorance of the law serves merely to inflame.

Related Articles

Third and finally, law school faculty must actively encourage counter-speech while discouraging disruption. Last year at my university, the George Washington University Law School, an LGBTQ+ student group strenuously believed that guest speakers invited by our chapter of the Federalist Society were hateful, discriminatory, and belonged nowhere on campus. Even so, the event proceeded without any substantial disruption of the sort witnessed at Stanford, and faculty intervention likely had something to do with it. As the event approached, two professors of mine expressly discouraged students from disrupting the event, emphasizing the importance of free speech. Critically, one of these professors, herself an expert in First Amendment law, gave the LGBTQ+ student group a platform to advertise their counter-speech event, which was to take place simultaneously alongside the Federalist Society event somewhere else on campus. In so doing, she vindicated the old adage of Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: for “falsehoods and fallacies, … the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”

Today’s law students are tomorrow’s judges and advocates — the very people upon whose respect and understanding the continuing vitality of free speech depends. Law schools must restore a culture that embraces the First Amendment. Otherwise, freedom of speech awaits the same fate as the right to jury trial contemplated by our Founders: death by neglectful legal profession.

Charles Brandt is a J.D. candidate at the George Washington University Law School and a writer and commentator for Young Voices.

​ Orange County Register 

Could the aging boom change our prejudice against ‘old?’

• April 2, 2023

Barry Rashap, 79, felt it at the bank, where a woman stepped in front of him because he was a step too slow to get in line.

“I actually said something, but she didn’t respond,” Rashap said. “But when she was done and I got up to the teller, he sort of said, ‘Good for you.’ He saw that she was rude to me because of my age.”

For Barbara Sloate, 86, the feeling has come as she’s aged into what she calls “an also.”

“At a certain point, you aren’t considered normal,” Sloate said. “It’s like, ‘Also, Mom will be there.’ You’re an also, an afterthought, even in your own life.”

And Darrielle Wilson, 89, said simply that it’s why she’s wary about disclosing her true age.

“If I tell you I’m almost 90, then that’s it; I’m out. No invites to parties or anything. But if I can still look closer to 70, then I’m still considered part of life.

“I’m not talking about vanity,” she added. “I’m talking about being considered still truly alive, or not, because of your age. And that feeling, right there, that’s ageism. That’s pretty obvious.”

Two other things also are obvious.

Barbara Sloate. (Photo by Jeff Gritchen, Orange County Register/SCNG)

First, Rashap, Sloate and Wilson are part of America’s fastest-growing demographic cohort – older people.

Since 2010, census data shows that the population of people age 65 and older has jumped by about 38%, compared with 2% growth for people younger than 65. By 2032, the American population is projected to be home to more older people (65 and up) than kids (ages 18 and under). And by 2050, nearly 1 in 4 Americans will be 65 or older, up from today’s ratio of about 1 in 6. What’s more, the oldest of all the age cohorts – Americans 85 and up – is the fastest growing subgroup, expected to double between now and 2040, according to the Administration on Aging.

By any measure, the pattern is clear: American demography is skewing older in ways that could reshape, among other things, how we feel about the idea of “old.”

The second thing that’s obvious is this: For now, Americans don’t particularly like “old.”

Though our culture idealizes respect for age and wisdom and experience (the federal government says May is “Older Americans Month”), real life suggests ageism is rampant and rank. And while it’s a two-way street (younger people are sometimes dissed, often by their elders, as “entitled” or “self-obsessed” or “soft,” among other things) ageism against older people is more common, and often comes with little pushback.

“Frail,” “forgetful,” “diminished,” “greedy,” “needy,” “racist,” “too-stupid-to-understand tech,” “smelly;” all are literal descriptions or inferences applied to older people in everything from TV commercials to movies to birthday cards.

And it’s not just words. Though age-related bias in the workplace has been illegal since the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (and mandatory retirement has been outlawed since 1986), the practice remains so entrenched that the Equal Opportunity Commission described it as “a significant and costly problem for workers, their families and our economy.” And a study by Yale professor and ageism author Becca Levy (“Breaking the Age Code: How Your Beliefs About Aging Determine How Well & How Long You Live”), found that in 2018 age-related stigmas and bias resulted in about $63 billion of wasted health spending.

Or, just consider this: Which word would you rather have applied to you, “youthful” or “elderly?”

It’s unclear how, or if, the aging boom will change that answer.

Old views

Yale professor Levy has written about what she describes as a coming “age-stereotype paradox.” Essentially, it means that while logic suggests the rising numbers of old people in America should tone down ageism, serious research on the subject shows that ageism is actually becoming more common.

“Two contradictory elements comprise this paradox: the increase in age-stereotype negativity versus an increase in age-stereotype positivity that a number of factors suggest should be occurring,” she wrote.

Ed Romero, 96, a long-time leader at the Oasis Senior Center, helped organize the Freedom Shrine. (Photo by Jeff Gritchen, Orange County Register/SCNG)

Or, as Ed Romero, 96, puts it:

“I’m not sure what ageism is, exactly, but I’m guessing it could go either way, right? It could get better; it could get worse.”

Romero, a retired educator and union leader from Newport Beach, said he’s only recently felt the pangs of advanced age. He sometimes forgets a word. He walks a bit slower than he used to. His hearing isn’t spectacular. Still, despite that, in most other ways Romero remains the same guy he’s always been: smart, interested in people, curious, happy.

He’s also an example.

Today, Romero, by remaining capable and energetic into his mid-90s, defies stereotypes about people his age. Soon, by their sheer numbers, millions of active older people might redefine those stereotypes, maybe even obliterate them.

In theory, a fast-growing world of active, healthy, independent older people could blunt ageism, or at least make the bias less likely to gain traction.

In a 2019 article published by the Gerontological Society of America, Levy wrote about the notion that a lot of young people seeing a lot of Romero-type older people in action could reduce the name-calling. “More contact between members of a stigmatized group and a non-stigmatized group will lead to more positive views of the stigmatized group.”

Alas, Levy noted in the same article, such contact is rare.

“There has been an increase” in age segregation in ways that, Levy later noted, “would be considered harmful” if applied to, say, racial or religious groups.

Instead, in America, age segregation remains a booming industry.

Entire communities – places like Laguna Woods Village and Leisure World in Southern California, The Villages in Florida and Sun City, Arizona – are sold to people age 55 and older who don’t want to live near younger people. And it’s not just housing. Vacations often are sold based on age. Same for education, financial advice, restaurants, fitness, entertainment; American companies sell the idea that older people and younger don’t want to mingle, and Americans buy it.

But it wasn’t always so.

A study of historical census data shows that in 1850 7 in 10 older people lived with their adult children, while about one in ten (11%) lived alone or with a spouse. Multi-generational living was the norm.

By 1990, it wasn’t. The census from that year shows a near reverse from the numbers of 1850, with 7 in 10 older Americans living alone or with a spouse, and the remainder either living with adult children or in adult-care facilities.

That, too, might change. The aging boom figures to add to the nation’s housing shortage, and a fast-rising solution – gaining traction in Southern California, New York and other higher-priced real estate markets – is multi-generational living. In 2021, Pew Research found that multi-generational households, nationally, had quadrupled since the 1970s, and that about 17% of older people now share a dwelling with adult children.

But even if a lot more older people and younger people start living together, it’s unclear if that will soften, or amplify, friction between the generations.

Another hallmark of the coming aging boom is that more Americans soon will be accepting Social Security and Medicare and fewer will be paying in. Though government spending is complex, and people collecting Social Security do so after contributing into it for decades, that older bubble in the population could put pressures on younger taxpayers that weren’t faced by future retirees. That, in turn, could lead to a world in which older people are viewed as what Utah Sen. Mitt Romney once described as “takers.”

It’s possible that dynamic is already upon us.

Darielle Wilson, 89, teaches a literature class at the Oasis Senior Center in Newport Beach. (Photo by Jeff Gritchen, Orange County Register/SCNG)

“Civility is gone,” said Wilson, a retired community college professor who still teaches literature – in English, French and Spanish – to people 50 and older at the Oasis Senior Center in Newport Beach.

“There’s a lot of competition, I think, between the generations,” she added. “And it could get worse. I hope it doesn’t, but it could.”

Why not old?

In colonial America, public seating arrangements put older people – regardless of their economic rank – in prime positions. Even some clothing, as recently as the late 1800s, was designed to make the wearer look older, not younger.

All of that reversed in the 20th century. From about 1900 through the late 1960s, aging was increasingly denigrated and older people were viewed as non-essential, at least in popular culture. Youth was revered; age was smeared. Studies of words used in media and literature found words like “geezer” and other negative age descriptions became increasingly common. Levy wrote that depictions of age and older people became “increasingly negative” over a 200-year window.

But, for a while now, older people have been fighting against that.

Old age should not be viewed “as a disastrous disease” but, instead, should be seen as a time of “strength.”

Maggie Kuhn, founder of the Gray Panthers – a group that pushes for civil rights for all ages and against ageism – said that in 1978.

By 2023, America’s new demography is leading to a similar message, at least in the marketplace.

“Age boldly” is the tagline for NextTribe, a company that provides journalism and adventure travel for women ages 45 and older. It’s one of thousands of companies catering to a fast-growing world of consumers who essentially want to live in ways that reflect their health, energy and brains, not their chronological age.

“I’m trying to make it so you don’t have to be scared to get older,” said Jeannie Ralston, the founder of NextTribe.

“It’s not a marketing thing. The population is changing; what we’re doing just reflects it.

“Age isn’t a winding down time, it’s a ramping up,” Ralston added. “I certainly don’t think the women who read our magazine, or travel with us, feel sorry for themselves.”

So, will “old” ever be a compliment?

“Hopefully, but I don’t know about that one,” said Ralston, laughing.

Some people who qualify say it already is.

“My mother was a power, a force to be reckoned with,” said Sloate, who, before retiring some years ago, ran a travel agency while raising four children. “She was never ‘old’ in any sense, positive or negative.

“I’d like to think I’ve inherited that.”

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Instead of dreading your 80th birthday, here’s what to do instead

• April 2, 2023

Q. I am about to turn 80 years old and cannot stop focusing on my birthday. In fact, I am dreading it. Any tips on managing 80 for a woman moving into this new decade? I am grateful yet apprehensive. Many thanks. T.F.

Gratitude is appropriate. If you were born in 1900, you may have lived only 47 years, which was life expectancy at that time. Fortunately, for most, there is predictable life ahead. Today, the average life expectancy for an 80-year-old woman in the U.S. is 90.1 years.

Not-so-good news: Unfortunately, age is a risk factor for illness and particularly for chronic conditions. We know that 80 percent of adults 65 and older have at least one chronic condition; 68 percent have two or more. Then there is Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias that increase with age. The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association reports three percent of people aged 65-74, 17 percent of those aged 75-84 and 32 percent of those 85 or older have Alzheimer’s dementia. Loss of mobility is a concern. The CDC reports mobility problems are prevalent among 35 percent of those age 70 and the majority of those over age 85. 

Add to that our ageist environment that suggests older women should never look their age and do everything possible to look younger. This message is conveyed by magazines, newspapers, the entertainment industry and social media. How often have we heard, She looks great for her age? Industries remind us to dodge aging with Botox, Restylane, lotions, potions and more. 

Some good news: These risk factors can serve us well by motivating us to embrace a healthy lifestyle that can slow the aging process and mitigate risks that accompany aging. For example, strength training can increase muscle mass which means you can get stronger helping to prevent mobility problems. Learning anything new can create new neural pathways in our brain-enhancing cognitive functioning.  Having friends and acquaintances can also mitigate risks of cognitive decline. Living with a sense of purpose can lead to greater longevity. 

More good news: Most people are happier in their 80s than in their younger years according to the research of psychologist Katherine Etsy. Based on the results of interviewing 128 octogenarians over three years, she told CNBC, “The stereotypes that people have in their minds about old age are just completely wrong,” she says. “The array of what people are doing in their 80s is stunning. Many people are pain-free and living full lives and traveling.” She found three reasons why this is so: People in their 80s have a sense of purpose; they experience less stress, worry and anger than in their younger years and they live in the moment. 

The recent Academy Awards winners have given us some positive messages about older women. In the movie “80 for Brady” starring Rita Moreno, Sally Field, Jane Fonda and Lily Tomlin, we see women in starring roles from ages 77 to 91 years. Best actress award winner Michelle Yeoh, aged 60, said, “Ladies, don’t let anyone tell you (that you) are ever past your prime.” “Never give up.” These women are not 80 years old; however, they are adding to a slowly changing mindset about older women. 

On the lighter side, here are some benefits of reaching 80 years that may allay some of your concerns and make you smile as quoted in “The Bulletin.”  

You will never have to experience adolescence again.
80 years have made you wiser. 
Napping is allowed.
You don’t have to do something unless you want to.
Means lots of birthday cards.
You not only know history; you have lived it. 
It’s an awesome number just as you are an awesome person.
You’ve learned a deeper appreciation of most everything dear in your life.

We need to be aware of the risks that accompany aging and commit to a lifestyle that mitigates those risks. We also need to ignore messages from society that tell us women at the age of age 80 are less than – in terms of beauty, capability, creativity, caring, contribution and experiencing joy and wonder. We need to take this awareness and translate it into healthy behaviors and positive self-concepts to the extent possible. That can help begin to change our feelings about our own older birthdays.

So happy birthday, T.N. and thank you for your good question. Enjoy that special day with best wishes for many wonderful years ahead. On that day and every day, be kind to yourself and others.

Helen Dennis is a nationally recognized leader on issues of aging and the new retirement with academic, corporate and nonprofit experience. Contact Helen with your questions and comments at [email protected]. Visit Helen at HelenMdennis.com and follow her on facebook.com/SuccessfulAgingCommunity

​ Orange County Register 

Alleged sexual misconduct, cover-up at Redlands Police Department triggers FBI probe, sources say

• April 2, 2023

Persistent allegations of sexual misconduct at the Redlands Police Department, culminating with a new claim alleging three ranking supervisors attempted to cover up evidence, have triggered an administrative investigation by the city and an FBI probe.

In a claim for damages filed against the city on March 16, forensic specialist Geneva Holzer alleges that in December 2019, now retired Deputy Chief Mike Reiss, then a lieutenant, and Sgt. Kyle Alexander attempted to destroy physical evidence of sexual misconduct by Reiss.

Holzer found what she believed to be a semen stain on an office chair of a former employee who sued the city last August, alleging she was coerced into engaging in sexual acts with Reiss to advance at the department.

In her lawsuit, former property and evidence technician Julie Alvarado-Salcido alleged, among other things, that she was coerced into performing oral sex on Reiss in her office in August 2019.

Holzer was not aware of Salcido’s specific allegations at the time, but says in her claim that she nevertheless tested the stain. Tests returned positive for semen, but it was unclear whether Reiss was the source of it.

Holzer, who earlier this year was recognized as Employee of the Year for exemplary service to the department, reported her discovery of the semen-stained chair to Alexander. The following day, she alleges in her claim, he told her to dispose of the chair.

When Holzer hesitated, according to the claim, Alexander told her to cut the semen sample from the fabric, dispose of the chair, to “not be descriptive” in her report and to send the report and photos of the chair directly to him via email.

“He told me not to put anything in our evidence system photo wise and don’t put the report into our reporting system,” Holzer said in her claim. “What Sgt. Alexander told me to do was done this way so no one would know about it, and it would never be discovered by anyone else.”

In February, Holzer said in her claim, she became aware of an encounter colleague Ruth Samano had with Reiss and Alexander in the department’s forensic office in 2019. Samano told Holzer the two entered the office and started “looking around.”

Samano, according to the claim, asked Reiss and Alexander if they were looking for the chair. Reiss replied, “You know about the chair?” to which Samano replied, “Yes, and it’s not here.” Reiss and Alexander then abruptly left the office, according to the claim.

Discovery of the evidence, according to Holzer, was reported to Cmdr. Stephen Crane, but never made it further up the command chain to Deputy Chief Travis Martinez, whom Crane reported to.

Holzer alleges Crane also was complicit in the cover-up.

Redlands Police Chief Chris Catren, who retired in March, speaks to residents during Coffee with the Chief on Feb. 22, 2018.(Stan Lim, Redlands Daily Facts/SCNG)

“Through the chain of command my discovery of evidence of sexual assault was covered up and ordered destroyed by Deputy Chief Reiss then carried out by Sgt. Alexander and Commander Crane,” Holzer alleges in her claim.

Department scuttlebutt

In January, Sgt. Patrick Leivas, acting on scuttlebutt swirling within the department, confronted Holzer about the evidence, which she disclosed to him, according to department sources and the claim.

“I believe Sgt. Leivas reported it to multiple law enforcement authorities and an investigation was started into what happened,” Holzer said in her claim.

Sources within the department, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Leivas presented the evidence to Martinez and Redlands City Councilmember Paul Barich. Martinez subsequently took the evidence to the FBI’s public corruption unit, which launched the federal probe.

Martinez declined to comment.

FBI spokesperson Laura Eimiller said she could neither confirm nor deny whether the agency was investigating the Redlands Police Department. But department sources and attorneys representing current and former employees confirmed as much, saying investigators already have interviewed several current and former employees, including Holzer and Salcido.

Barich declined to comment on the investigation or his role in it, other than to say, “All parties are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but it always has been a standard policy that the city of Redlands would not put up with any sexual harassment. So if allegations do come true, then we will take appropriate action.”

Barich said he has not been interviewed by FBI investigators, who sources said now have the forensic evidence from the chair.

Department retirements

Reiss, according to Holzer’s claim, was placed on administrative leave on Jan. 30, then subsequently retired. A spokesperson for the California Public Employees’ Retirement System said Reiss retired on March 4 and is receiving a gross monthly pension payment of $15,728.

Reiss could not be reached for comment.

Reiss’ retirement occurred about the same time as that of Police Chief Chris Catren, who unexpectedly announced on March 2 that he would step down due to a work-related back injury.

Catren was president of the California Police Chiefs Association when he retired, and his departure came at a time of major changes in the department, including moving forward on a new police headquarters at the former Kmart building at Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street.

Reached by telephone Friday, Catren said his retirement was in no way connected to the sexual misconduct and evidence-tampering allegations. It was solely medical related and at the recommendation of his doctor, he said.

“The two have nothing to do with each other. Nobody asked me to leave,” Catren said. “The timing is an unfortunate coincidence, but they have nothing to do with each other.”

Administrative investigation

Around the time Reiss was placed on leave, the city commissioned Laguna Niguel-based JL Group to conduct a “limited scope legal services workplace investigation,” according to a Feb. 3 letter from JL Group attorney/principal Jeffrey Love to City Attorney Yvette Garcia, obtained via a Public Records Act request.

City spokesperson Carl Baker said in an email that JL Group is conducting a “full and comprehensive investigation into each of the allegations of misconduct raised recently to determine the facts in this matter.” He said the investigation is still in its preliminary stages and should take three to four months.

“The City of Redlands takes all allegations of misconduct very seriously. While the recent allegations are significant, the City is committed to a thorough process that will determine the facts and is fair to all parties involved,” Baker said, declining further comment.

History of sexual harassment

Holzer alleges that as a result of her allegations that the semen evidence was suppressed, she became a target of continued sexual harassment by Reiss for more than two years. Two lawsuits filed against the city in the past two years by current and former employees allege a similar pattern of sexual misconduct by Reiss.

In April 2021, former police Officer Laurel Falconieri and Leslie Martinez, a 23-year veteran of the department and crimes against children detective, sued the city alleging a hostile work environment for women in the department as a result of “pervasive sexual favoritism.”

Falconieri alleged Reiss often told her how good she looked, invited her out for drinks and to his condo in Carlsbad, and sent her a picture of himself shirtless, but she immediately deleted the picture and did not respond to him out of fear, according to the lawsuit.

Like Falconieri before her and Holzer after her, Salcido alleges in her suit that Reiss targeted her for sex after she was hired as a fingerprint technician in August 2015. But unlike Falconieri and Holzer, Salcido was compliant with Reiss’ alleged demands for sex, feeling scared and pressured because he was her immediate supervisor, her lawsuit alleges.

Salcido alleges Reiss followed a similar grooming pattern of predatory behavior, regularly inviting her out for drinks and to his condo in Carlsbad. He also requested she send him nude photos of herself.

The sexual misconduct was so prevalent, not only with Reiss but department-wide, that the alleged victims say it fostered its own lexicon of female subordinates having ranking superiors “in their pocket,” meaning they engaged in sexual activity with them in exchange for favorable working conditions and other perks.

In the interview with Catren, the former chief said the allegations advanced by Falconieri, Martinez and Salcido were all investigated and findings were made, but he could not disclose what those findings were.

​ Orange County Register 

Los Alamitos softball wins Michelle Carew Classic with boost from Taryn Clements’ bat

• April 2, 2023

The Los Alamitos softball team showed its versatility and toughness during this week’s Michelle Carew Classic, and that included the way it won the tournament’s Gold Bracket final Saturday night.

The Griffins defeated No. 1 seed St. Francis of Mountain View 4-2 in the championship game at Peralta Canyon Park in Anaheim.

They struck early for two runs using aggressive base running, but the key hit was a solo home run by catcher Taryn Clements in the fourth inning that put the Griffins ahead 3-2.

The Griffins went 4-0 in the tournament, and each of their victories showcased different strengths.

They shut out Mission Viejo 3-0 in the first round, used a grand slam by Clements to beat Orange Lutheran 4-2 in the quarterfinals and as a group pounded the ball in a 12-3 win over Huntington Beach in the semifinals Saturday afternoon.

Related Articles

Los Alamitos entered the week ranked No. 1 in Orange County and No. 2 in CIF-SS Division 1.

Because of rain on Wednesday and Thursday, tournament organizers created two different brackets, Gold Bracket and Silver Bracket, and all of the games were played Friday and Saturday.

Rio Mesa defeated Vista Murrieta 1-0 in the Silver Bracket final.

​ Orange County Register