County's police unions locked in lawsuit over allegations from sheriff's election
The contentious Palm Beach County sheriff's election that pitted incumbent Ric Bradshaw against Michael Gauger, his former top deputy, has been over for more than five months. But the wounds it inflicted show no signs of healing anytime soon.
Bradshaw, who won the election, was endorsed by the Palm Beach County Police Benevolent Association; Gauger by the Fraternal Order of Police. The two police unions are now locked in a messy lawsuit filed by the PBA.
John Kazanjian, president of both the county and state chapter of the PBA, alleges in the suit that FOP leadership defamed him by making false statements that tarnished his reputation and cost the PBA membership. The lawsuit cited claims by FOP leaders that he committed 'fraud, obtained documents by criminal means, embezzled funds from the foundation of his late daughter — Kailin Kazanjian, and misappropriated deputies' cost-of-living adjustments for improper means.'
The PBA lawsuit takes issue with a letter written by the FOP accusing Kazanjian of 'enriching himself on the backs of men and women he represents.' The FOP says that Kazanjian was scared that Gauger might win because 'a victory would almost certainly end the Kazanjian gravy train and it should end because PBSO should not be his personal cash cow.'
Bradshaw, who is serving a record fifth term, defeated Gauger by 15 points. The alleged defamatory statements were made in the context of the sheriff's election, according to the FOP, and were not made with malice, a criterion that must be met for a defamation lawsuit to be successful.
'Plaintiffs (Kazanjian and the PBAs) are public figures subject to the actual malice standard,' according to the FOP's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. If the court rules that Kazanjian is a public figure, he would have to show that the comments were made 'with reckless disregard' for the truth or with malice. The FOP argues the comments made fall within the protections afforded by the First Amendment.
According to the PBA lawsuit, the FOP responded to Kazanjian's support of Bradshaw 'by manufacturing a malicious defamation campaign' against Kazanjian as well as the county and state PBAs. All three are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Named as defendants are FOP Lodge #50, Luis Blasco, Carlos Dorta and Wilhelm Prieschl, the FOP leadership.
The FOP and PBA compete against one another to represent police officers in South Florida. To increase its membership, the lawsuit alleges that the FOP launched a concentrated effort to destroy the reputation of the PBAs and Kazanjian "by any means necessary."
The FOP strategy was to make 'false and defamatory attacks to poach PBA members,' according to the PBA. And the strategy, to some extent, has worked, as police departments have left the PBA to join the FOP, the PBA acknowledged in its lawsuit.
RELATED STORY: Palm Beach County sheriff race already bringing accusations and animosity
'The false accusations of serious criminal misconduct and unethical behavior to Kazanjian's reputation is immeasurable and impossible to repair," the suit said. The reputation to the PBAs is equally devastating, according to the PBA.
The FOP sent a letter to its membership accusing Kazanjian of stealing from a charity he founded in honor of his late daughter, Kaitlin, who died in a car accident in 2003. The FOP bases its charge on the PBA's income-tax filing that reports that Kazanjian received $101,070 from a related organization. The filing, though, reports that no one from the charity received any compensation, but because the charity's board members are also members of the PBA, the compensation from the PBA was listed. The FOP wrongly reported that the salary came from the charity, according to the PBA.
RELATED STORY: Trump supporters tussle with Bradshaw backers at State Road 7 intersection
The FOP also alleged that deputies attended a fundraising golf event on overtime that raised more than $300,000 yet only $79,000 were awarded scholarships. Another accusation made by the FOP is that the PBA violated federal law by gaining access to Gauger's personnel file and falsely reporting that Gauger never served in Vietnam.
Jack Scarola, the attorney representing the FOP, told The Post that the PBA lawsuit 'is not going anywhere,' adding: 'There are very significant legal impediments for them to overcome. They are trying to restrict FOP leadership from communicating with its membership. And we will be contesting many of the factual assertions they have made.'
Courtney Caprio, the lawyer representing Kazanjian and the PBAs, said 'defamation isn't protected by the First Amendment. There is no constitutional value in false statements of facts, and we look forward to our day in court.' She said it was necessary 'to file the lawsuit to vindicate our clients' reputations, which were unjustly attacked and smeared by the false and defamatory statements published by the FOP and its board members.'
Mike Diamond is a journalist at The Palm Beach Post, part of the USA TODAY Florida Network. He covers Palm Beach County government and issues impacting homeowner associations. You can reach him at mdiamond@pbpost.com. Help support local journalism. Subscribe today.
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: PBA police union sues rival FOP over election allegations
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What started the LA protests? Immigration raids sparked outrage
The protests in Los Angeles County began as a reaction to a handful of immigration raids, including one outside a Home Depot and another at a clothing manufacturer in the city's garment district. The raids and subsequent outrage came as the Trump administration stepped up its detention and deportation of immigrants including at workplaces, traffic stops and routine legal check-ins. Protests against these moves have increased, too. While most have remained peaceful, the Department of Homeland Security reported a more than 400% surge in assaults on agents. After small protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles on June 6, Trump took several swift actions, calling in the 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 Marines, drawing ire – and at least one lawsuit – from California officials who accuse the president of stoking tension and escalating unrest. Live updates LA police make 'mass arrests' after downtown curfew kicks in Trump has stood by his actions, saying the deployments were necessary to contain what he described as "violent, instigated riots." About 150 people have been arrested at the protests, which have included flareups of unruly clashes, vandalism and looting, but have remained limited to a few blocks in the city's downtown area. As authorities brace for another day of protests and Los Angelenos ready themselves for the increased military presence, here's what to know about how the protests began. On Friday, June 6, the protests began as a reaction to immigration raids that took place in several parts of the city, including outside a Home Depot and a clothing manufacturer in the city's garment district. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said local immigrant rights groups had confirmed at least five ICE raids in the Los Angeles region. The mayor said officials were still working to compile more information on the raids but noted that in some cases, ICE targeted day laborers and detained people who appeared for scheduled immigration appointments. "As you know, ICE does not tell anybody where they're going to go or when they're going to be there," Bass said. Relatives of detainees and other community members showed up to the ICE operations, taking videos and photos of the agents and beginning to protest. Some sought to interfere with the raids, blocking vehicles carrying people suspected of being in the country illegally. At one of the raids, federal agents arrested David Huerta, the president of the Service Employees International Union was arrested and accused of interfering with federal agents. The union said Huerta was exercising his First Amendment right to observe and document law enforcement activity. He was released June 9 on $50,000 bail. By the evening, demonstrators began to gather at the immigration services building and detention center in downtown Los Angeles. Police at 7 p.m. declared it an unlawful assembly and ordered the crowd to disperse. Soon, dozens of police officers arrived in riot gear. Some people rocks and chunks of concrete at officers, and law enforcement eventually used pepper spray, tear gas and flash bangs to disperse the crowd. Demonstrations stretched into Saturday, June 7, with protesters clashing with law enforcement in Paramount, a city about 20 miles south of downtown Los Angeles, where rumors spread about a potential raid at a Home Depot. Tensions flared, with some people in the crowd throwing objects and aiming fireworks at law enforcement, who threw tear gas and fired flash-bang rounds. Another protest broke out in the nearby city of Compton, where a car was lit aflame. Around 6 p.m. Trump signed a memo directing the Secretary of Defense to mobilize the California National Guard. Newsom shot back, saying law enforcement could handle the protests and did not need troops on the ground. The protests, which were concentrated over a few blocks in downtown Los Angeles, continued into Sunday, June 8. Flare ups led demonstrators to block traffic on the 101 Freeway and set several electric vehicles on fire. That night, Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell said he believed most protesters were nonviolent and blamed the violence on people "who come in from other places just to hurt people and case havoc." More arrests took place at demonstrations on Monday, June 9, as Trump made the decision to double the National Guard presence and send in hundreds of Marines. Authorities have begun to clean up graffiti downtown and are preparing for the possibility of more protests this week. Contributing: Elizabeth Weise and Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY; Reuters This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What started the LA protests? A look at ICE raids that sparked outrage
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Dallas, Fort Worth Police Ready Ahead of ‘No Kings Day' Mobilization
Police in Dallas and Fort Worth are preparing for this weekend's protests against President Donald Trump. Left-wing activists are planning nationwide protests against Trump June 14, dubbed 'No Kings Day.' Various demonstrations will take place across the DFW metroplex. As The Dallas Express previously reported, this comes on the heels of violent anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles and Dallas. Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker told The Dallas Express she has 'full faith' in the Fort Worth Police Department to manage the 'No Kings Day' protest this Saturday. She said, 'the city has been coordinating with state and federal agencies to allow for peaceful protests but upholding law and order in our community.' Fort Worth Police will be monitoring the protests, said Officer Cynthia Wood in an email to The Dallas Express. 'The Fort Worth Police Department is working closely with our community and our Intelligence Fusion Center to monitor all activity during any peaceful protests that may take place in the City of Fort Worth,' Wood said. The Dallas Police Department's 'main priority' is the safety of people who 'live, work, and visit' the city, according to a statement Lt. Tramese Jones provided to The Dallas Express. 'The Department will not interfere with a lawful and peaceful assembly of any individuals or groups expressing their First Amendment rights,' Jones said. 'Participants will see our patrols as they always do at large events.' The Dallas Express asked for more specific details, but Jones said, 'we do not release that information for operational reasons.' 'No King's Day' protests are scheduled for June 14 in downtown Dallas and Fort Worth, according to an online event map. The left-wing demonstrations are also set to take place in Arlington, Burleson, Denton, Euless, Flower Mound, Frisco, McKinney, and Sanger. The Indivisible Project, a powerful left-wing network, is working with other prominent progressive advocacy groups to sponsor 'No Kings' protests across the nation June 14. The group has boosted similar protest movements earlier this year, providing things like 'infrastructure to get the campaign off the ground,' according to The Federalist. As The Dallas Express previously reported, Indivisible was funded in part by George Soros' Open Society Foundations. Indivisible's Fort Worth chapter targeted Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and County Commissioners Matt Krause and Manny Ramirez in a post on Bluesky. 'Black, Brown, White, queer, immigrant, working class. We rise together! We're done w leaders who divide us. WE run the show. Not the likes of Tim O'Hare, Manny Ramirez, and Matt Krause, trying to build their MAGA safehaven.' 'Peaceful demonstrations are a constitutional right as long as they don't escalate into violence, rioting and lawlessness like what we've seen in California. That type of behavior will not be tolerated in Tarrant County,' O'Hare said to The Dallas Express. 'I have full confidence in the Tarrant County Sheriff's Office and all our local police departments that law and order will be maintained. Tarrant County has earned its reputation as a safe place to live, and we intend to keep it that way.' The 'No Kings' protests are partnering with groups including 50501, which – as The Dallas Express previously reported – targeted the metroplex with demonstrations earlier this year. Other prominent groups include the ACLU, Bernie Sanders and his group Our Revolution, Move On of the Tesla Takedown protests, and May Day Strong of the recent May Day protests. Organizers are coordinating the protests through the left-wing platform Mobilize America. As The Federalist previously reported, Mobilize falls under Bonterra – which was launched by the London-based private firm Apax Partners, and which also oversees the Democrat Party's comprehensive voter database. The Dallas Express reached out to 'No Kings,' but the group did not comment in time for publication.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Protesting in Tennessee: What are your rights?
Rhetoric surrounding constitutionally protected protests, both on the state and national level, has been heated lately. More than 20 Tennessee gatherings are expected June 14, which is President Trump's birthday and the date of a scheduled U.S. Army's 250th anniversary parade. People may also assemble ahead of the arraignment of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man whose deportation to El Salvador made him a flashpoint regarding Trump's immigration policy. It's scheduled for 10 a.m. June 13 in Nashville. If you choose to partake in this classic First Amendment activity, here's what you should know about your rights: More: 'No Kings Day' protests planned for June 14 with aim to reclaim the American flag Yes. The First Amendment protects the people's right to protest through the enshrined rights of free speech, assembly and petition. However, there are some narrow restrictions on the exercise of these rights that are allowed to be implemented by law enforcement and government officials in the interest of public safety. Rarely, though it can depend on your location. There is a First Amendment principle commonly known as the 'public forum doctrine,' which divides most government property into three categories: traditional public forums, limited public forums and nonpublic forums. Most protests occur in traditional public forums, which includes locations like public parks, public sidewalks and areas usually open for expressive activity. Former Supreme Court Judge Byron White, who is known for defining the borders of speech forums in the case Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983), said that in 'quintessential' public forums, 'the government may not prohibit all communicative activity,' and noted that most content-based restrictions in these areas should be viewed with serious caution. The First Amendment only restricts the actions of the government regarding speech, not that of private individuals, organizations or businesses. If you are in a public space, you have the right to video and photograph anything within plain view, including law enforcement, federal buildings and fellow protesters. If you are audio recording in public, there is generally an understanding that there is no expectation of privacy. However, you should be aware of your state's laws regarding consensual audio recording. While a majority of states favor one-party consent for audio recording, some require two. Tennessee is a one-party consent state. Check your state's law here. If you enter private property, these First Amendment protections do not apply, and the property owner may set the rules for audio and visual recording. Some states have laws known frequently as 'halo' laws, which dictate how closely citizens can stand to law enforcement when officers are working. Tennessee recently passed such a law, which bans standing within 25 feet of a police officer after being told to retreat. It will go into effect on July 1. Similar buffer-zone laws in Arizona, Louisiana, Florida and Indiana, which have no exception for journalists, have all faced public and legal pushback on First Amendment grounds. Yes. The Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. Johnson (1989) that burning the American flag is a form of protected speech and expression under the First Amendment, with the Court later affirming in United States v. Eichman (1990) that a federal statute against flag burning would be unconstitutional. The issue has sparked debate recently after Trump called for protesters who burn the American flag at protests to spend a year in jail. 'They proudly carry flags of other countries, but they don't carry the American flag. They only burn it," Trump said on June 10, while speaking at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. "People that burn the American flag should go to jail for one year. And we'll see if we can get that done." It's not the first time Trump has made the claim. At a campaign event in Detroit, Michigan in August 2024, he proposed the same punishment, complaining that advisors told him it was unconstitutional. 'They say, 'Sir, that's unconstitutional,'' he said. 'We'll make it constitutional.' Law enforcement cannot confiscate your phone or camera, nor demand to review its contents, without a search warrant, per citizen's Fourth Amendment rights. They may ask you to stop videotaping or photographing if the action is legitimately interfering with public safety or law enforcement activities. Even if you believe officers are violating your First Amendment rights, do not resist or argue with officers. Instead, calmly assert your First Amendment right to demonstrate while asking if you are free to leave. If you are, leave immediately. If you are placed under arrest, ask for a lawyer immediately. Do not say or sign anything until a lawyer is present. The USA TODAY Network - Tennessee's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. Have a story to tell? Reach Angele Latham by email at alatham@ by phone at 931-623-9485, or follow her on Twitter at @angele_latham This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Protesting in Tennessee: What are your rights?
