This story has taken another strange and unexpected twist. Our son, Jesse, filed a lawsuit against Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) about six months ago. Now, TVUSD has filed a cross complaint against the Riverside Sheriff’s Department and Riverside County.
The rationale is striking and is best summed up in paragraph 7 of the Cross Complaint (which can be viewed below).
So TVUSD is claiming that if they are found liable, the county and the police should be responsible for paying all of the damages, (as well as TVUSD’s attorney fees), because of the sheriff’s department’s “negligent, unlawful and tortious conduct” and their “unconstitutional entrapment, search, and seizure” of Jesse.
At the same time, their response to Jesse’s lawsuit continues to be that he is a drug dealer.
If it should be found that cross-complainants are liable under the allegations contained in the complaint (which allegations cross-complainants have denied and continue to deny), then cross-complainants are informed and believe, and upon such information and belief allege that the negligent, unlawful and tortious conduct of cross-defendants, and each of them, including any alleged unconstitutional entrapment, search, and seizure, was active, primary and affirmative, and that the conduct of cross-complainants, if any, was passive, secondary and derivative only.