Councilman Kevin de León’s lawsuit names as defenders only former county fed employees Karla Vasquez and Santos Leon who have been identified by Los Angeles Magazine as possibly having been involved in the taping of the conversation recorded in October 2021.
Los Angeles City Councilman Kevin de León and former Councilmember Gil Cedillo have filed separate lawsuits over an apparently illegal recording they allege did permanent harm to their reputations and careers in what became the biggest City Hall scandal of recent times.
Both de León and Cedillo allege invasion of privacy and negligence and seek damages.
Cedillo’s lawsuit is against the powerful union coalition, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, as well as former federation employees Karla Vasquez and Santos Leon. The two are married and were employed by the federation when the recording took place.
De León’s lawsuit names as defenders only Vasquez and Leon who have been identified by Los Angeles Magazine as possibly having been involved in the taping of the conversation recorded in October 2021.
In July, the magazine reported that Santos Leon, “a bookkeeper for the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor was the one who secretly recorded the racist backroom banter among the city’s most powerful politicians.”
That same month, the Los Angeles Times, citing sources who spoke anonymously because of the ongoing investigation, reported that police officers the previous month had searched the Eagle Rock home of Leon and Vasquez. Police took Leon’s computer as part of the investigation, the Times reported.
But the juicy part of the story was originally reported by Los Angeles Magazine.
According to the magazine, “police have discovered the reason Leon planted the recording device in the first place: He was convinced that (then County Federation President Ron) Herrera, whose wife Karla Vasquez was his executive assistant, was badmouthing him and trying to convince her to end their marriage.”
“One source inside the investigation describes Leon as a ‘very macho guy’ who had grown ‘paranoid that Ron was talking s— about him, urging [Vasquez] to leave him,’ and wanted to capture it on tape.”
Police Chief Michel Moore previously said the department’s Major Crimes Division was investigating the leak at the request of “individuals that were present at that meeting.”
It still remains unconfirmed that Santos Leon recorded the conversation and who leaked it.
The recording was leaked in October 2022, creating a political furor that forced the resignation of then council President Nury Martinez, who also participated in a meeting held at the Federation of Labor offices.
De León withstood widespread demands for his resignation, which included President Joe Biden, and he has announced he will seek reelection in 2024.
Cedillo had already lost his own reelection bid earlier in 2022. He remained in office, but was hounded into virtually disappearing from City Hall for the remainder of his term last year.
Ron Herrera, the then-head of the labor federation, also resigned his position.
The conversation, which centered on the city’s once-a-decade redistricting process, included racist and derogatory remarks about Black Angelenos, Oaxacans and others.
Both de León and Cedillo argue in their lawsuits that the respective defendants “surreptitiously recorded” the conversations without knowledge or consent — and also allege that the release of the audio was a “textbook ‘October surprise’” designed to inflict maximum reputational and political damage.
Cedillo seeks punitive damages, general damages and compensatory damages, among other things, maintaining that the leaking of the audio caused him to lose income and job offers after leaving the City Council. De León claims that the recording and its release made him the “target of verbal assault, ethnic slurs, death threats, being spat on, and permanent damage to his reputation and political future.”
De León is represented in his lawsuit by the law firm of Geragos & Geragos, and Cedillo’s suit was filed by Kabateck LLP.
But the filings include similar language, arguing among other things, that comments heard in the recording were taken out of context or featured Spanish slang that was not properly translated.
Cedillo’s lawsuit also notably states:
“But the most glaring fact omitted from the public discourse over this conversation is that Mr. Cedillo never made any comment that was even remotely offensive during the illegally recorded conversation. He was, in fact, silent during those comments.
De León’s lawsuit contains the same sentence, only with “Mr. De León” replacing “Mr. Cedillo.”
