Was it necessary to hold a cop civilly responsible for getting his former girlfriend’s arrest on fabricated charges of a sex crime?
As far as Michelle Hadley was concerned, the answer to the above question was pretty obvious. Five years ago, Hadley underwent a nightmarish situation after she ended her relationship with Deputy Marshal Ian Diaz. As per court documents, Diaz demanded Hadley have sex with strangers as he secretly shot it from a different room. Diaz argued that Hadley organized an illicit smear campaign against his wife, Angela, and orchestrated a masked man’s attempt to rape her.
Anaheim’s police officers ignored the truthful pleas of Hadley about her being framed. Therefore, they filed multiple misdemeanors and felonies against Hadley that came with a possible life imprisonment penalty if convicted. Hadley spent 88 days imprisoned in Orange County’s Jail. There, she had to live in a small and sparse space 23 hours a day due to a demand for bail worth $1 million. There, she also endured indecent behavior from not just demented inmates but also obnoxious deputies.
Over 6 months into the unpleasant situation, and after a defense attorney’s continued goading, a US prosecutor conceded that police officers had been deceived. There was no evidence of attempted rape on Angela, but there was evidence that she sent threatening electronic mails impersonating Hadley.
Angela was serving a 5-year-long punishment in a California prison adjacent to Wasco. Police refused to press charges against Diaz, as one might expect. Anyhow, Hadley felt that the vengeful deputy marshal played a part in the plan to falsely incriminate her. Hadley wanted a civil jury in the future to hold Diaz responsible for fabricated imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and the act of inflicting emotional distress.
In the lawsuit, Hadley’s lawyers told federal judge David Carter that Diaz not only fabricated emails as fake evidence, in agreement with Angela, but also used his clout in law enforcement to make the police arrest Hadley. From May to July 2016, Diaz and Angela pretended to be Hadley with the fake email IDs they made to deliver threatening and violent messages to Angela. The couple further created dozens of fabricated police reports that implicated the woman in crimes that she never committed.
After that, impersonating Hadley, they responded to web advertisements that led strangers to their condominium to satisfy fantasies of rape with Angela. In one case, the made-up crimes went one step further, as Angela claimed that Hadley directed a masked person to attack her in their garage.
Hadley’s lawyers asserted that even numbskull detectives in Anaheim could have easily exposed those allegations with false evidence through basic investigative skills. Anyhow, Diaz’s attorneys described the accusations against their deputy marshal client as ‘frivolous’ and devoid of facts to support those. The attorneys told the judge that the conspiracy theory of Hadley against the client was implausible. They also said that the facts showed that Angela deceived both Anaheim’s cops and Diaz through her conduct.
Diaz’s attorneys also claimed that he enjoyed immunity for the communications he made with police that brought about her unnecessary arrest. As for those attorneys, Diaz had probable reason to believe that Hadley was guilty, albeit wrong. As for them, it was expected that Hadley would argue that the deputy marshal was liable as he falsely blamed her for crimes and thus wrongfully made California press charges against the plaintiff. The test was whether the individual made some affirmative move to goad the prosecution through pressure or advice, versus just offering information.
The attorneys added that letting citizens tell cops anything irrespective of negative effects on an innocent individual was a good stance regarding public policy. For them, a legal claim of malicious prosecution did not require Diaz to verify the details he offered to cops when he cooperated with the officers with honesty. It was unnecessary to hold a person, who innocently offered erroneous details to cops, liable for the outcome of law enforcement’s further investigation.
Hadley’s lawyers hit back with their opposing perspective. They found pure communication with cops to be beyond the purview of liability. Anyhow, they said that that immunity did not cover a citizen’s malicious conduct that aided or promoted the unlawful arrest of a peace officer. In that scheme, Diaz repeatedly forced police to get Hadley apprehended. For instance, when law enforcement reacted to Diaz and Angela’s false accusation that the woman was stalking and harassing them, the deputy marshal asked officers whether a way of arresting Hadley was available. More than just communicating with police, repeatedly, Diaz would offer false evidence, urge those officers to arrest Hadley and insist that there were criminal tendencies in the woman.
In June 2019, Carter supported the actions of Diaz. The federal judge recognized the woman’s complaint that Ian Diaz was controlling and was upset about her resistance to his requests to her to satisfy the deputy marshal’s fantasies with anonymous folks. The judge also noted Hadley’s stance that Diaz made false allegations against her, and that the officer used his status in law enforcement to help with her arrest. Anyhow, the judge also opined that the communication from the officer that caused Hadley’s arrest was shielded from liability. The judge seemed determined to dismiss Diaz from the woman’s lawsuit, which targeted the Anaheim Police Department too.
Hadley’s lawyers expected that Carter would reconsider the stance he took as a federal judge. They argued that Diaz fabricated crimes and evidence to blame Hadley for horrific crimes. Diaz mangled the judicial precedence to make the court believe that he deserved safeguards that would protect individuals who erroneously report crimes from liability. They also argued that the deputy marshal’s deliberate and drawn-out plan with multiple steps to frame the women was no error. Then, Carter scheduled a hearing for September 30, 2019, at the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse in Santa Ana to consider what to do next.
