Doña Ana County Sheriff Kim Stewart faces 5th civil lawsuit
Legal Battle Ensues: Former Deputies Challenge Doña Ana County in Whistleblower Retaliation Case
In a recent legal development, a new lawsuit has emerged challenging the actions of Doña Ana County officials. The case, which has garnered significant attention, revolves around allegations of retaliation under the Whistleblower Protection Act. The plaintiffs, a married couple and former law enforcement officers, claim they faced adverse consequences after engaging in union activities and resisting participation in purportedly illegal conduct. This unfolding story sheds light on the complexities of workplace rights within law enforcement agencies and the protections afforded to those who speak out.Unveiling the Struggle for Justice: A Tale of Courage and Consequence in Doña Ana County
Background of the Case
The legal dispute in question was initiated with the filing of a civil lawsuit against key figures in Doña Ana County, including Sheriff Kim Stewart. The plaintiffs, Obed and Perri Marte, both of whom served in the county's sheriff's office, have brought forth serious accusations under the Whistleblower Protection Act. Their tenure with the department began in April 2020, a time when their marital status and qualifications as public employees were well recognized by their employer.
As the narrative unfolds, it becomes clear that the Martes' professional journey took a turn following their involvement in union-related activities, leading to a series of events that would culminate in this legal confrontation.
Allegations of Retaliation and Discrimination
The crux of the lawsuit lies in the alleged retaliatory actions taken against the Martes. The couple asserts that their participation in union activities and their refusal to engage in illegal or unethical behavior triggered a backlash from the sheriff's office leadership. The lawsuit details a pattern of bullying, harassment, and discrimination that the Martes claim to have endured as a result of their stance.
These allegations suggest a troubling environment within the sheriff's office, where standing up for one's rights and adhering to ethical standards could potentially lead to punitive measures.
The Plaintiffs' Union Involvement and Subsequent Treatment
Perri Marte's role as a Public Information Officer and her subsequent involvement in the Union Negotiation Committee are highlighted as pivotal moments in the lawsuit. Her acceptance to sit on the committee and the ensuing conversation with Sheriff Stewart marked the beginning of a strained relationship, according to the legal documents.
The lawsuit alleges that following the disclosure of her union activities, Perri Marte was subjected to a cold shoulder from Stewart, with communication between them coming to an abrupt halt. This alleged isolation is portrayed as the first in a series of retaliatory actions.
Perri Marte's Removal from Position and Resignation
Perri Marte's removal from her position as Public Information Officer in July 2021 is depicted as a direct consequence of the alleged retaliation. The lawsuit describes continued harassment and bullying, which ultimately led to her reassignment to the courthouse. Her attempts to transition from patrol to courthouse security were thwarted, and she was eventually compelled to resign after being informed that her need for light duty could no longer be accommodated by the sheriff's office.
This section of the lawsuit paints a picture of a dedicated officer whose career was derailed by the very institution she served.
Obed Marte's Termination and Aftermath
Obed Marte's experiences, including his involvement in officer-involved shootings and the lack of mental health support provided by Sheriff Stewart, are detailed in the lawsuit. His creation of a satirical newsletter, which led to his termination, is presented as an act of whistleblowing that was met with severe repercussions.
The lawsuit further recounts Obed Marte's appeal to the County Manager and the subsequent investigation by the New Mexico Law Enforcement Academy, which resulted in a temporary suspension of his law enforcement certification. His eventual return to duty in November 2022 is noted as a partial resolution to his ordeal.
Plaintiffs' Demands for Justice
The final thrust of the Martes' legal challenge is their call for justice. They seek actual and compensatory damages, equitable remedies, and reinstatement to their former positions. The lawsuit underscores the couple's determination to rectify what they perceive as wrongful termination and to hold the responsible parties accountable for their actions.
Their fight for justice is not just a personal battle but also a stand for the rights of public employees to engage in union activities without fear of retaliation, setting a precedent for others in similar situations.
