a day ago
Sherri Papini tries to take her Shasta County eviction case behind closed doors
For the second time in a week, Sherri Papini, the Shasta County woman convicted of fraud and lying to the FBI in connection to her 2016 faked kidnapping, has attempted to have her case discussed in private with a court official.
Papini's lawyer did meet Wednesday privately in chambers with Shasta County Superior Court Commissioner John Berglund in connection to a temporary restraining order Papini filed against a woman who claims Papini stole her boyfriend.
But on Friday, Berglund denied Papini's separate request to meet privately in a case in which Papini is being evicted from a Shingletown home owned by a former boyfriend. Papini is representing herself in the eviction case.
Papini gained worldwide fame when she went missing in November 2016 while she was out for a jog near her home north of Redding. She turned up 22 days later on a rural road in Yolo County, bruised, branded and with her long, blonde hair cut short.
At the time, she told law enforcement she had been kidnapped by two Hispanic women who physically abused her.
Her story unraveled in March 2022 when the FBI arrested Papini, who admitted to faking her kidnapping and inflicting the injuries to herself. She later admitted to voluntarily staying in Costa Mesa, California, with an ex-boyfriend the entire time.
She pleaded guilty to mail fraud and lying to the FBI later that year and was sentenced to 18 months in prison and was ordered to repay some $309,000 to state, federal and local government for expenses related to her case.
In a new docuseries, Papini continues to claim she was abducted in 2016, but now she says she was held against her will by the former boyfriend. She says in the documentary, the narrative that she was kidnapped Nov. 2, 2016 by two Hispanic women is a lie manufactured by the media.
Papini's lawyer, and a lawyer representing the woman who Papini alleged stalked her, met with Berglund in chambers on Wednesday. After the private meeting, the commissioner and two lawyers emerged, and Berglund announced the case had been settled and was dismissed.
Papini, who did not have a lawyer with her in court Friday, again attempted to meet privately with the commissioner.
She gave Berglund a note that said "due to the sensitivity of the case," she wanted to meet privately with the judge rather than in open court. The commissioner denied that request and told her that Friday's hearing was only a status conference and said neither of the parties would discuss the merits of the case.
David Loy, legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, said it is not unusual for settlement conferences, such as the one discussed Wednesday in the temporary restraining order case, to be discussed in private.
But in-chambers meetings with a judge or court commissioner are allowed only under limited circumstances, he said. Private meetings are typically not allowed just because the issues surrounding a case are sensitive.
"That alone is not enough. In other words, just because it's embarrassing or sensitive, that's not enough. And lots of court cases are embarrassing or sensitive. Most of them are (sensitive) kind of by definition. People don't go to court unless there's something bad going on," Loy said.
Read more: Prior to Sherri Papini's arrest, these were the major events in her 'kidnapping' case
Elizabeth Elizondo, the attorney who represented the property owner trying to evict Papini, said meeting with a judge privately is unusual and that during her career she has never met with a judge in chambers.
"It is not normal. They never do it for this type of hearing," Elizondo said in an email.
The Shingletown house where Papini lives is owned by Shawn Hibdon of Orland. Papini claims she had an agreement with Hibdon, a former boyfriend, to eventually purchase the house. But the two broke off their relationship and Hibdon sent Papini a notice in January that she was being evicted.
Hibdon is using the eviction as an opportunity to publicly shame her, Papini said in a statement filed with the eviction case.
"The plaintiff (Hibdon) has made threats both implied and explicit ― that unless I purchase the home under specific, unfavorable terms, I will be evicted, publicly humiliated or face further harm to my personal financial well-being," she wrote in the declaration.
Elizondo, who represents Hibdon, said Papini's claims were not true. Elizondo and Hibdon tried to resolve the dispute before going to court and attempted to avoid going public with the disagreement.
"Additionally, we had to break our silence and issue a statement because defendant's side threatened to involve the media if settlement negotiations were not pursued under her terms. There were also threats to release potentially embarrassing messages involving the plaintiff," Elizondo said in a statement.
"These actions appear to be aimed at publicly humiliating the plaintiff (Hibdon) — the very thing she has accused us of doing to her. We feel it is important to acknowledge these threats so that if any information is released it can be viewed in the proper context," Elizondo said.
Reporter Damon Arthur welcomes story tips at 530-338-8834, by email at Help local journalism thrive by subscribing today!
This article originally appeared on Redding Record Searchlight: Sherri Papini tries to take eviction case behind closed doors
