San Rafael Saga: Guard’s Recording Might Be Unlawful
A California Metro Patrol guard released body cam footage of San Rafael Elementary School principal Rudy Ramirez.
AUGUST 29, 2022
PASADENA, Calif. — A private security guard who videotaped a public school principal without consent might have violated California’s privacy law.
The 25-year-old male guard — whose full name has not been confirmed — used a body-worn camera with audio to record San Rafael Elementary School Principal Rudy Ramirez while he made a series of arguably racist and sexist comments.
According to the Invasion of Privacy law, illegal recordings come with consequences. The guard or security company principal could be punished by a fine up to $2,500 per violation or imprisonment up to one year, or both. If the guard was previously convicted of such a violation, he could face punishment by a fine up to $10,000 per violation and one year imprisonment.
California is a two-party consent state. Only a few exceptions exist, including footage taken by police-worn body cameras. This is not police footage.
Ramirez had been outraged after police officers ambushed his head custodian on Sunday, August 14. With hands on holsters and stun rifles slung about their shoulders, four officers broke through a chain lock after which they demanded that the custodian get to his knees. They also cuffed the custodian for nearly seven minutes, despite obvious signs that the man was at the school to do his job.
Ramirez was especially vexed because the 911 call came from a neighbor. He said neighbors had erroneously registered complaints for years. In fact, this neighbor’s 911 call was wildly inaccurate, according to a publicly available recording of the call.
Once the police cleared the scene, the guard from California Metro Patrol, a private security firm, remained at the site to greet Ramirez, 20 minutes after the incident commenced. The guard did not inform Ramirez that he used a body-worn camera to record video and audio of the principal for more than eight minutes.
The guard also submitted a written report to the Pasadena Police Department. He is typing or texting during his recording of Ramirez.
According to the report, Ramirez said, “This is fucking bullshit. [The police] should not be handcuffing one of my janitors. I bet if he was white, he wouldn’t have been treated like that. Fuck these nosy-ass white neighbors. How about when it was white kids jumping the fence vandalizing classrooms and drawing dicks on the walls and leaving beer cans on the roof — no one calls.”
None of those statements appear on the guard’s videotape — at least the version that the city provided to the public.
Metro Patrol owner Joseph Perez has thus far refused to answer any of our questions about the tape or his policies. He was extremely defensive on our call. He said this is matter for his attorney.
We do not know if Ramirez has retained an attorney. He too has declined comment. We await answers to our requests for documents from various city departments. They have 10 days to respond to our August 22 inquiry.
We have detailed Ramirez’s videotaped comments on this site. The issue is whether the covert recording of such comments can subject the guard, Metro Patrol and the city to legal action related to the privacy law.
We also want to know if the police, former interim City Manager Cynthia Kurtz and Mayor Victor Gordo actively coordinated to publicly release the recordings in an effort to distract the public from the questionable police response.
We submitted a series of questions for Gordo. He has not yet responded.
Gordo released a public letter at roughly the same time that the police — who fall under Kurtz’s domain — released the recordings. Gordo supported the police and berated Ramirez. He also said he found it difficult to accept the principal’s apology — an indication that he wanted Ramirez terminated.
Hundreds of school parents felt differently. In a letter to Gordo, school superintendent Brian McDonald and the school board, the parents castigated the police response and showered Ramirez with support. By contrast, less than 20 parents submitted their opposition to Ramirez.
McDonald said, “The conflict does not serve a purpose for students. It continues to be a distraction. We must now move on to discuss what we can do so this never happens again.”
McDonald would not discuss if or how he would discipline Ramirez. He did say discussions are ongoing. He and Kurtz said Metro Patrol is a school district security contractor. We have requested the terms of that contract.
As McDonald and the school board debate the weight of the distraction, the apparently unlawful video might be the key to preserving Ramirez’s stewardship of the school. Should Ramirez or a third party hire legal representation to determine that the video is illegal, the district might be hard-pressed to terminate or even severely reprimand the principal.
In fact, the mere thought of such legal action might be enough to keep Ramirez at the helm.
The district has posted an interim principal while it decides how to proceed.