Azusa Settles Gascon Chief of Staff Lawsuit

The City of Azusa has filed a notice of settlement in the civil suit brought against it and one of its police officers by Joseph Iniguez, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon’s chief of staff.

The notice does not detail the terms of the settlement but it does state that an as-yet unspecified payment will be made to Iniguez in the near future.

Once the case has been completely finalized, the terms of the settlement will be public.

Iniguez filed the suit last January after being arrested for public intoxication by an Azusa officer.

Briefly, the incident apparently unfolded as follows: after he and his soon-to-be husband were pulled over by an Azusa officer for making an improper U-turn on December, 11, 2021, Iniguez reportedly became belligerent.

After the officer approached the car he caught a strong aroma of alcohol. Iniguez, the passenger in the car, said he had been drinking and the odor was his. Iniguez was arrested though his fiancé – after it was determined he was below the legal blood-alcohol limit – was not charged in relation to the incident.

Iniguez captured the entire incident on video – a video he has never publicly released – that he says shows him acting in a proper and professional manner before being wrongly arrested for public intoxication, a direct contradiction of the officer’s statements that he was slurring, using obscenities, and threatening him with illegally placing him on the “Brady list,” a compendium of cops the District Attorney’s office consider unreliable and/or problematic.

As Iniguez is an employee of the district attorney, the incident was turned over to Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office for investigation. Bonta – who has very close political ties to Gascon – declined to pursue charges citing statute of limitations issues.

Iniguez’s attorney Glenn Jonas said his client is pleased with the settlement.

“When we commenced this litigation, the Azusa Police Department Union was blocking implementation of a Body Worn Camera program. During the litigation the City modified its policy to include implementation of a Body Worn Camera program and this will serve as a measure of protection for all,” Jonas said.  “With his public policy objectives of greater protection for the community, accountability and awareness reached, Mr. Iniguez agreed to settle the case. I commend both the City of Azusa and Mr. Iniguez for moving forward.”

Attorneys for Azusa declined to comment.

One thing the settlement could mean is that the video that Iniguez claims completely exonerates him will never be seen by the public, a fact that concerns retired veteran prosecutor and former president of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys Marc Debbaudt.

“If the city didn’t see the video, then why did they settle?” Debbaudt wondered.  “And if the video was all that Iniguez says it is, then why would he settle?  That would be big money.”

Debbaudt believes Azusa settled as taking the path of least resistance towards ending a nuisance suit.

It should be noted that quite often (note – speaking from personal experience as a former mayor and councilmember) city leaders have no say in whether or not to settle.  Typically, once a lawsuit against a public agency is handed over to the insurance company for defense, that is the last decision a city council takes in the matter. If a council refuses to go along with a settlement, the insurance company can then dump everything – lawyer costs, potential case loss costs, etc. – back on the city and its taxpayers directly (that’s one of the reasons people sue cities so often – they usually settle, no matter the case.)

The settlement is expected to be finalized in the next month or so.

The video that Iniguez claims to show him as the real victim in the case could be released by Iniguez at his discretion  at any time as it is his private property.

Pretty sure we’re going to be waiting a lot longer than a month or so for that to happen.