Youngblood alleges Scrivner received 'preferential treatment'
Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood, speaking almost 10 months after he oversaw an investigation that led state prosecutors last week to file five felony counts against former county Supervisor Zack Scrivner, said Thursday the defendant should have been arrested, booked and charged with a sex crime.
The fact those things didn't happen suggested to Youngblood that Scrivner received "preferential treatment" that not even the president of the United States was afforded after being indicted in August 2023 on 34 counts of racketeering and related charges.
"For the public, the optics of it are horrible at the very least," the sheriff told The Californian. "Because we never do it that way."
Youngblood said evidence he is aware of should have prompted the California Department of Justice to charge Scrivner under section 288 of the California Penal Code, which deals with lewd or lascivious acts against a child under the age of 14.
Instead, prosecutors accused Scrivner of three counts of child endangerment, including getting into bed with and inappropriately touching a minor. The two other felony counts were for alleged firearms violations.
Scrivner pleaded not guilty. His next court date is May 1.
State prosecutors took over the case because county District Attorney Cynthia Zimmer is Scrivner's aunt. She is the person who Youngblood has said called him the night of April 23 saying her nephew was having a psychotic episode at the family's Tehachapi home and that he was armed with a gun.
Two days later, Youngblood told reporters one of Scrivner's four children stabbed him that night to protect another sibling from their father, who was found to be in possession of a small amount of psychedelic mushrooms and about 30 firearms.
A spokeswoman for the state Department of Justice did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.
Youngblood said he has never seen a defendant walk into a courtroom, having been charged with a felony but without having been arrested, and then leave without being booked.
"This is abnormal. There's no reason. Something is not right here," he said. "It appears a deal was struck … ." He added that communication his department has had with state prosecutors, which he declined to discuss, made him think the state was building a case of defense for Scrivner "as opposed to a case of prosecution."
Scrivner's Bakersfield defense attorney, H.A. Sala, dismissed Youngblood's assertions, saying prosecutors didn't bring a sex crime charge "because it cannot be proved beyond a reasonable doubt."
There was no need to arrest Scrivner because he appeared in court at 3 p.m. the day after being informed he would be charged.
"That was the magistrate's determination" not to have Scrivner arrested or booked but instead release him on his own recognizance, Sala said. He added the former supervisor was neither a flight risk nor a threat or risk to public safety, and for those reasons "did not need to be arrested."
A spokeswoman for Kern County Superior Court, where Scrivner was arraigned Friday, denied Thursday that Scrivner received preferential treatment. Without addressing specific questions including why he was never arrested or booked, spokeswoman Kristin Davis said by email, "The court treated Mr. Scrivner the same as any other defendant would be treated."
Sala said there was no preferential treatment — "absolutely not. If anything, the opposite of preferential treatment." There should have been no charges, but if any had to be filed, they should have been misdemeanors and not felonies, he said, adding, "In my view, this is heavy-handed."
Sala added that the sheriff's statements were inappropriate.
"Those kinds of assertions, I think, undermine due process of law and undermine the fairness and integrity of the judicial system," he said.
"With all due respect to the sheriff, he's not a lawyer," Sala said. "He's not the prosecutor."
(Editor's note: This story has been changed to clarify that Sala said no charges should have been filed against Scrivner.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
4 hours ago
- Gizmodo
Guy Scores 120 Free Flights by Posing as Flight Attendant Before Getting Busted
From the 'God forbid a man have hobbies' file, the Department of Justice announced this week that a gentleman who posed as a flight attendant and scored more than 100 free flights over the course of six years has been convicted of wire fraud and entering into a secure area of an airport under false pretenses. In a plot that frankly doesn't seem that wild if you watched the most recent season of Nathan Fielder's 'The Rehearsal,' 35-year-old Tiron Alexander allegedly managed to secure flights that were supposed to only be available to pilots and flight attendants. According to the Department of Justice, Alexander was able to book the flights by falsifying employment information and providing badge numbers that apparently allowed him to bypass the security of the online booking options for airline employees. Alexander's primary victim was a single airline, through which he allegedly booked 34 different flights. He submitted documentation showing that he worked for seven different airlines and reportedly provided more than 30 different badge numbers over the course of his bookings. He was also able to duplicate the process that let him fly for free as a faux employee across three more airlines, ultimately booking a total of 120 free flights between 2018 and 2024. NBC News reported that, according to court documents, Alexander does (or did) work for an airline—one that is headquartered in Dallas, which would include Southwest Airlines and American Airlines on the passenger side and Ameristar Jet Charter and Flexjet on the cargo/charter flight side. He reportedly started working there in 2015, but at no point was he a flight attendant or a pilot during his time at the company. The Transportation Security Administration was involved in investigating the case that was eventually brought to court, according to the Department of Justice. None of the airlines that got caught up in Alexander's scheming were mentioned in the announcement, which is not surprising, as they are likely pretty embarrassed about the whole thing. It doesn't exactly speak highly of the security protocols they have in place. Of course, neither does the fact that Nathan Fielder was able to get people to follow airline employees around for days to study their behavior for a comedy show, so, not exactly a banner year for the airline industry. We also keep having communication blackouts at air traffic control centers around the country, for what it's worth. While he has been convicted, the man is still waiting to see what his penalty will be. A judge will rule on Alexander's sentencing on August 25.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses
NEW YORK − The Trump administration on June 12 sued New York state for its law restricting federal immigration enforcement inside state courthouses. The lawsuit challenges a New York state law that blocks immigration officials from arresting people at or near New York courthouses. The complaint, filed in federal court in Albany, New York, alleges the law frustrates federal immigration enforcement at a venue - state courthouses - where authorities can safely make arrests. U.S. Justice Department lawyers said New York's law and policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration officers violated the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law. The lawsuit filed in federal court in Albany comes after the administration has increased immigration enforcement at workplaces and while people appeared for immigration court hearings. People have protested against the federal actions in cities across the country. Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed so-called 'sanctuary city policies' for violence seen in California. Sanctuary policies generally refers to those limiting local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has also sued four New Jersey cities for their laws. New York state had similar policies preventing agents from apprehending migrants, Bondi said in a statement. 'This latest lawsuit in a series of sanctuary city litigation underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to keeping Americans safe and aggressively enforcing the law,' she said. Justice Department lawyers challenged the 2020 state law preventing federal officials from arresting people for civil immigration violations at state courthouses without a signed judicial warrant. New York's 2020 law doesn't apply to federal courthouses or immigration court, according to the legislation's author, state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat who called the lawsuit 'baseless and frivolous." The Justice Department said in a news release that enforcement at courthouses reduces risk of people fleeing or dangerous situations, especially since there is enhanced screening inside court buildings. State officials said federal agents entering local courthouses make communities unsafe by preventing people from accessing the judicial system. The law ensures New Yorkers can pursue justice without fear, Geoff Burgan, a spokesperson for state Attorney General Letitia James, said in a statement. 'Due process means nothing if people are too afraid to appear in court,' he said. James would defend the law and 'all of New York's laws, just as she will continue to defend the rights and dignity of all who call New York home,' Burgan said. Hoylman-Sigal, who authored the law, said the lawsuit was part of the administration's 'ongoing assault on the rule of law in New York.' To avoid conflicting with federal law or federal immigration authority, the law doesn't apply to federal courts or immigration courts, he said in a statement. Meanwhile, it allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest people in local courthouses when they have 'actual, valid judicial warrants.' 'At a time when masked ICE officials are roaming the state and lawlessly detaining New Yorkers without any due process, the law preserves access to justice and participation in the judicial process,' he said. A contentious issue has been federal agents targeting people in 'sensitive" areas. Prior Department of Homeland Security guidelines banned enforcement in areas such as schools, places of worship and hospitals. When President Donald Trump took office in January, DHS overturned the longstanding policy to give agents discretion on such actions. The administration enacted another policy permitting enforcement at or near courthouses. Justice Department lawyers also challenged two New York executive orders restricting civil immigration arrests at state facilities, and a separate policy preventing state employees from sharing information to federal officers related to civil immigration enforcement. 'Through these enactments, New York obstructs federal law enforcement and facilitates the evasion of federal law by dangerous criminals, notwithstanding federal agents' statutory mandate to detain and remove illegal aliens,' the complaint said. The same day as the lawsuit, Gov. Kathy Hochul was one of three Democratic governors testifying before Congress about "sanctuary" policies and immigration enforcement. Hochul said her state has cooperated with ICE since she's taken office. "But we have to draw a line somewhere,' Hochul said. 'New York cannot deputize our state officers to enforce civil immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa.' The administration's attack on the 2020 law would turn courthouses 'into traps,' Donna Liberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. It would further force immigrant communities into the shadows. An initial conference date for the lawsuit was scheduled for Sept. 10, court records showed. Contributing: Bart Jansen, USA TODAY Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courts
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Newsom Beats Trump As Court Curtails POTUS' 'Illegal' Use Of Troops In L.A.
(Updated with Newsom statement) Donald Trump has just been ordered by a federal judge to 'return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith.' Forthwith meaning in practical terms means noon PT Friday with even more orders from the bench to possible follow. In an order handed down Thursday just a couple of hours after a pitched hearing in San Francisco between Department of Justice lawyers and Golden State attorneys, Judge Charles Breyer awarded Gavin Newsom the temporary restraining order he sought over Trump's federalization of the California National Guard on June 7 after protests over ICE raids of undocumented immigrants in and around L.A. More from Deadline Downtown L.A. Curfew Exceptions In Place For Performing Arts Venues Including Dorothy Chandler Pavilion & Mark Taper Forum As Curfew Extends Into Third Night - Update L.A. Curfew Extended For Third Night Running Ahead Of Saturday Demonstrations - Updated Arnold Schwarzenegger Condemns Media Depicting L.A. As "War Zone" Amid ICE Protests: "Isn't Really The Case" 'At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions,' the judge wrote in a 36-page order this evening. 'He did not.' The Bill Clinton appointed judge added: 'His actions were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.'Newsom and the state Attorney General first filed suit against Trump, Defense Sec. Pete Hegseth and others in the administration on June 9. The gist of their argument was that the president overstepped his authority when he dispatched National Guard troops to the region to respond to protests of ICE immigration raids late last week. The governor said the president violated the law by not consulting with him first before the deployment. On June 11, Newsom upped the ante and demanded a TRO to halt 'ongoing and unnecessary militarization of Los Angeles' and Trump's brazen authoritarian tactics ASAP. Trump's DOJ lawyers pushed to have the 1 p.m. PT deadline set by the governor delayed, and Judge Breyer (brother of Clinton appointed Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who retired in 2022) agreed. He required more briefings from both sides and set a hearing on the matter for today at 1:30 p.m. PT. A hearing in which federal lawyers often seem not to know their own argument or the facts to back it up. Having already warned on 'a monarchy' in the hearing earlier today, Breyer worried in his order this evening that 'Defendants' actions also threaten to chill legitimate First Amendment expression.' To that, and with the overriding Constitutional and jurisdictional issues at play, he laid out exactly what's next for Newsom and Trump with this halting of military deployment to America's second-largest city: For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order:Defendants are temporarily ENJOINED from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los are DIRECTED to return control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom. The Court further STAYS this order until noon on June 13, are ORDERED to post a nominal bond of $100 within 24 hours. The bond shall be filed in the Clerk's Office and be deposited into the registry of the Court. If said bond is not posted by the aforementioned date and time, this Order shall be are further ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why a preliminary injunction should not issue. A hearing on this order to show cause will be held on June 20, 2025 at 10 a.m. Plaintiffs' moving papers shall be filed no later than June 16, 2025; Defendants' opposition shall be due no later than June 18, 2025, and Plaintiffs' reply shall be due on June 19, 2025. Whether or not this White House complies with Breyer's order is another matter. Less than two hours before today's hearing, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appeared to be backing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's avoidance of a congressional hearing in Washington, DC earlier in the day of whether or not the administration would respect court orders over its use of troops in Los Angeles. 'We are not going away,' Noem said at the same L.A. press conference where federal agents shockingly assaulted Sen. Alex Padilla, handcuffed and dragged him away for trying to ask the DHS chief a question. 'We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into this city,' Noem added with a reference to California and L.A.'s 'sanctuary' policies that prevent state and civic participation in federal immigration raids and detentions. Also, Thursday LA Mayor Karen Bass gave much more heated remarks than is usual for the circumspect politician in talking about the continued ICE rounding up of residents and the 4,000 Guard troops and 700 Marines on the streets in and around federal buildings and more. 'No matter what happens out of the White House,' the much Trump attacked Bass said today. 'We will always uphold and reflect what Los Angeles and the United States are truly about: freedom, tolerance and, for God's sake, our Constitution.' Almost as fast on the social media draw as Trump, Newsom went online soon after the order landed on the federal court docket. 'The court just confirmed what we all know — the military belongs on the battlefield, not on our city streets,' the Governor posted with a copy of the order. 'This win is not just for California, but the nation. It's a check on a man whose authoritarian tendencies are increasing by the day. End the illegal militarization of Los Angeles now, @realDonaldTrump History is watching. Best of Deadline 2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Tonys, Emmys, Oscars & More 'Stick' Release Guide: When Do New Episodes Come Out? 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series
