Pepper Spray

Six LA Probation Officers Charged With Unlawful Use of Pepper Spray Against Teenage Girls, One Officer Charged With Four Different Assaults

Celeste Fremon
Written by Celeste Fremon

On Friday afternoon, six Los Angeles County Probation officers were charged for unlawfully using pepper spray against a total of five different teenage girls who were confined in the detention officers’ care at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall, according to the LA District Attorney’s Office.

The charges against the six officers—five of whom were female, one male—involve six individual incidents that occurred between April 7 and July 21, 2018.

All six of the incidents involved the alleged use of pepper spray against a young person in such a way that it qualified as an unlawful assault (CA Penal Code Section 149).

But in the case of four of the incidents, some or all of the officers involved reportedly “prevented the victims from being decontaminated after they were sprayed,” wrote the DA’s office in its official statement.

The felony complaints issued for the arrest warrants use harsher language in characterizing the no-decontamination charges, which are described as causing “a child to suffer and be inflicted with unjustifiable physical pain,” and  “willfully” causing “said child to be placed in such situation where his/her health was endangered.”

(You can read the complaints yourself here: Wilson, Vilchez BA476681 and  Harrison, et al BA476688)

Furthermore, one of the six, a 47-year-old senior detention officer named Marlene Rochelle Wilson, was charged with unlawful use of pepper spray in four separate incidents, which occurred on four different days,  involving four separate girls.

In three of those four alleged incidents, according to the felony complaint, the individual girls involved were deliberately prevented from getting the burning spray off of their bodies.

In addition, one of the teenagers was allegedly sprayed on two different occasions, 20 days apart—on July 1 and July 21, 2018, by different officers.  On July 1, 2018, she was reportedly not allowed to decontaminate after being sprayed.

“I choose to view this unfortunate situation as an example of how this Department will not tolerate the abuse of the authority bestowed upon all of us in this profession,” Chief Terri McDonald wrote in a statement sent out to probation union leaders following the news of the criminal charges.

“If you observe a miscarriage of justice, a misuse of authority, or abuse of any kind, it is your responsibility to disrupt and report the incident. The individuals under our supervision are relying on our ability to discern, protect, and uphold the laws by which we all abide.”

In her public statement, Chief McDonald, emphasized that the department had themselves investigated of the alleged incidents that have led to the recent charges before referring the results of their investigations to the D.A.’s office.


More where these came from?

The news that aerosolized Oleoresin Capsicum, commonly called OC-spray or pepper spray, was being used abusively by certain staff in the county’s youth facilities, first came to public attention on February 5, of this year when the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) delivered a 28-page report to the LA County Board Supervisors detailing the use of pepper spray on the kids in the county’s care.

As WitnessLA reported, the OIG’s report painted a distressing picture of the use of pepper spray on the youth who are housed in LA County’s three juvenile halls and two of its youth probation camps.

In several incidents, wrote the OIG, the use-of-force reports filed by probation staff, after the use of OC spray, described kids behaving in ways that were “aggressive or threatening,” even when available video footage showed that the kid or kids appeared to pose “no threat” to staff.

“Staff appear to repeatedly place recently sprayed, un-decontaminated youth in their rooms,” wrote the report’s authors. “In several incidents, youth appear to have been left in their rooms, visibly struggling, for periods exceeding fifteen to thirty minutes, without apparent efforts to decontaminate them.”

In one incident the OIG reviewed, a boy “with a mental health condition” was engaging in self-harming behavior, and was OC sprayed in the groin and buttocks.

Following this use of OC spray, the frantic boy was one of those who was left in a room, which apparently lacked running water, for approximately 20 minutes before being decontaminated.

Another boy reported to investigators that he’d heard others suffering in their rooms “on several occasions following the application of OC spray.”

WitnessLA has asked representatives of probation, and also the district attorney’s office if the charges against the six detention service officers are the first of a larger number of charges that are likely to be filed for similar mistreatment of young probationers, such as those described in the OIG’s report.

So far, those we spoke with said they couldn’t say whether or not there would be more such charges coming.


Warning signs

The new charges have arrived approximately six weeks after the OIG’s report led to a unanimous vote by the LA County Board of Supervisors to phase out the use of pepper spray on the county’s kids.

The February 19 vote was also the culmination of a series of warning signs that pepper spray was often being used as the first go-to strategy when kids acted up, rather than the last resort.

As WitnessLA reported,  in early 2016, data was released showing that the use of pepper spray in the County’s juvenile halls had more than tripled between 2015 and 2017, a fact that was perplexing since the youth population in probation’s youth facilities was continuing to fall.

Although, by early 2018, the department’s numbers for use of OC spray were coming down slightly from their worst of their highs, the dramatic spikes—along with other “safety concerns” in the county’s juvenile halls and youth probation camps—caused LA County Supervisors Mark Ridley-Thomas and Janice Hahn to introduce a motion that triggered the OIG’s investigation, which in turn resulted in the February 5, 2019, report.

“The filing of criminal charges against six Probation officers validates the earlier concerns we raised about excessive – and now potentially illegal – use of pepper spray in our juvenile halls and camps,” wrote Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas in a statement after the DA’s office announced the arrests.

News of the charges, wrote Ridley-Thomas, “underscores the urgent need to safely and responsibly phase out the use of pepper spray, and to implement stronger oversight and other changes to be recommended by the Probation Reform and Implementation Team (PRIT).”

Youth advocates conveyed a similar message.

“While recognizing the presumption of innocence in our justice system, Friday’s charges underscore how wrongheaded it is to give chemical weapons to County Probation Officers, whose charge is to protect and rehabilitate youth,” said Ian Kysel, Staff Attorney of the ACLU of Southern California.”

Kysel also pushed for the LA County Supervisors to “expedite efforts to transform the juvenile justice system and create a new and powerful oversight body so that such abuse of children and youth never happens again.”


So who’s using—and overusing—OC Spray?

After department higher-ups began studying the use of OC Spray, said L.A. County Chief Deputy Probation Officer Sheila Mitchell when she spoke at a special PRIT hearing on the topic phrasing out OC spray, “at first we assumed” that it was being used “systemically.”

But then as Michell and company drilled down to find out who was really using the stuff, it turned out “it was only 36 percent of our staff that used OC spray,” she said. In addition, “if you were using OC spray you typically had less than two years of service, or more than ten years of service.”

Several of our probation sources told us that at least one, possibly two of those who were charged last week had previously engaged in unlawfully abusive behavior toward a kid or kids when working in one of the other juvenile halls, before transferring to Los Padrinos.

Hans Liang, the president of AFSCME Local 685, the union that represents rank-and-file probation officers, told reporters at NBC4 in a statement related to the charges, “We are professional peace officers and we do not support ever endangering the lives of those in our care. The new Chief Probation Officer has changed the rules without properly training and equipping us to handle the increasingly violent men and women in our care. The facilities in which we work have become more dangerous, we are understaffed, and under siege.”

Attorney Elizabeth Calvin, who is the senior advocate in the Children’s Rights Division of Human Rights Watch, had a different reaction when she tweeted after the news broke: “Finally. Calling it what it is. Child abuse. Assault.”


Postscript

All six defendants, who had their first court appearance on April 5,  are scheduled to be arraigned on May 23 in Department 40 of the Foltz Criminal Justice Center.

Deputy District Attorneys Kaveh Faturechi and Oscar Plascencia of the Justice System Integrity Division are prosecuting the cases.

At present, five of the officers charged are on unpaid administrative leave. One of the officers, supervisor LaCour Harrison, has resigned from the department.

The six officers charged are the following:

Marlene Rochelle Wilson (dob 11/26/72) charged with five felony counts of assault by a public officer and three misdemeanor counts of child abuse. She faces a possible maximum sentence of eight years and eight months in state prison.

Janeth Vilchez (dob 5/19/70) charged with one count each of assault by a public officer and child abuse. She faces a possible maximum sentence of four years in prison, to be served locally.

LaCour Harrison (dob 6/15/65) charged with one count of felony assault by a public officer and two misdemeanor counts of cruelty to child by endangering her health. He faces up to four years in prison to be served in local custody.

Claudette Reynolds (dob 1/9/62) charged with one count each of assault by a public officer and cruelty to a child by endangering her health. She faces up to 3 ½ years in prison to be served in local custody.

Maria Asuzena Guerrero (dob 7/15/90) charged with one count of cruelty to a child by endangering her health.

Karnesha Marshall (dob 2/11/91) charged with one count of cruelty to a child by endangering her health. Both Guerrero and Marshall face up to six months in jail.

9 Comments

  • The B.O.S should focus some attention on Terri-McDonald and tell her to kick rocks!! But then again she’s in their same circle along with the past Mcbuckles regime.

  • If LaCour Harrison is a woman, that makes all five charged female. What is the percentage of female to male probation officers? Seems like a pretty interesting detail, one that everyone seems to be ignoring (looking at you Witness La). Instead of scapegoating maybe they ought to be looking at the realities of locking up the most violent “kids” in Los Angeles

    • Speaking of reality, not one of these staff are Deputy Probation Officers. They were working as Detention Services Officers and one Supervising Detention Services Officer.
      Not unlike confusing Deputy Sheriffs for Custody Assistants but hey, what’s fact…

  • The Probation Department, especially the DSB, is in utter disarray. Closing the SHU and replacing it with the Hope Center (A Unit still without policy after two years) was a bad idea, Spreading Mental Health level minors throughout the regular living units was another fiasco. The DSB Manual is hopelessly out-of-date. DHQ has a Chief’s office with a turnstile instead of a door. The Halls are choked with entry level staff improperly trained to handle the day-to-day supervision. The BOS made this mess. Keep the reformer chiefs coming!! P.S. LaCour Harrison is a male supervisor.

  • Editor’s note:

    Good point, Maj Kong. As it happens, LaCour Harrison is a guy. I too assumed all six were women, and had a line in the story indicating as much. But in fact checking I learned I was wrong, so just took the line out, and never revisited the matter. But, I agree. The gender factor is interesting, and should be in. Thus I inserted it. Thanks for pointing it out.

    I don’t know the male/female percentages for the juvenile staff as a whole. But I’ll find out for future reference. It also would be good to know how those gender percentages play out when it comes to the 36 percent of staff who use pepper spray.

    I’ll be at a meeting tomorrow where I may be able to get that information. If I do, I’ll slot it in to the story, and let you know.

    Thanks again.

    C.

  • I think it is interesting and telling that Hans Liang, the president of AFSCME Local 685 said, “The new Chief Probation Officer has changed the rules without properly training and equipping us to handle the increasingly violent men and women in our care.” First off, these are children that we are talking about under the Probation Department’s care not men and women. Secondly, I believe statistics would prove Liang wrong in the fact that the youth under his and the rest of Probation’s care are increasingly violent. I believe violent crimes by youth are at an all time low. I would agree, however, Probation definitely needs more training in trauma-informed care, and deescalation techniques. Maybe if Probation treated the youth like the kids they are they would be able to more effectively do their jobs.

    • Wow, “trauma-informed care”? What kind of liberal tripe is that?

      These “kids” all did something serious or they wouldn’t be detained in juvie. They are extremely violent at times and know good and well that they can get away with a lot of crap because they are under 18. They can, and do, kill you just as dead as crooks over 18. Take another look at their faces, many of which are covered in gang tattoos, and realize that they have already made lifetime commitments to their culture of violence and criminality.

      A mental switch isn’t flipped the day they turn 18, causing them to suddenly become a threat to police and probation’s safety – they are a threat when they decided to commit adult crimes.

  • A pretty misleading title…NONE of these accused staff are Deputy Probation Officers.

    They are Detention Services Officers. The Supervisor is a Supervision Detention Services Officer.

Leave a Reply to Leibrich X