California’s ‘Suzie’s Law’ would stop abusers using survivors’ history against them | Opinion

Call it Suzie’s Law.

Currently known as Senate Bill 1386, by Sen. Anna Caballero, D-Merced, the bill would strengthen California’s historic “Rape Shield Law” and protect the privacy of survivors by prohibiting courtroom probes into their sexual histories in an attempt to discredit them.

Opinion

For Suzie — not her real name — the story behind the bill is a deeply personal one that spans decades, and is still ongoing. (“Suzie” is being granted anonymity by The Sacramento Bee because she was a minor at the time the abuse happened, and is named as a Jane Doe in the lawsuit.) Her story starts in 2002 when she was a typically bright and happy fourth grader, placed in Joseph Baldenebro’s classroom at Miramonte Elementary School in South El Monte, in Los Angeles County.

But during the next school year, Suzie says her teacher began to molest her.

“It was dirtiness. I will always think of it as dirtiness,” Suzie said. “Your mind is the complete opposite of rose-colored glasses. Everything is gray.”

According to court documents, Suzie is now involved in a civil lawsuit against Baldenebro and the Mountain View School District alleging that the trusted teacher’s abuse of her caused multiple emotional and psychological problems, including “anger, anxiety, depression, feelings of helplessness, insomnia, and significant trust and control issues.” Baldenebro previously faced a criminal suit by Suzie, as well as by other students. He was convicted and sent to prison for a total of 20 years.

But the school district’s legal defense has argued that a second instance of abuse in Suzie’s life is to blame for her trauma, and is fighting to get the case dismissed. If Suzie’s Law doesn’t pass during this legislative session, the district could win.

The abuse started in the classroom

Baldenebro worked at Miramonte Elementary School for 21 years, where he had a history of sexually abusing students. In 2018, Baldenebro was sentenced to eight years in prison for lewd or lascivious acts with minors and was ordered to register as a sex offender for life. He was sued again in 2020 by two female students who were both just 12 years old at the time, and cited a number of other instances of child sexual abuse in their felony complaint that led to his arrest, including Suzie’s case.

Baldenebro was then sentenced to an additional 12 years in prison.

“I thought (Baldenebro) was showing me love. I remember he hugged me in a grown-up type of way,” Suzie said. “It felt wrong to not allow myself to be loved; he was bigger. They’re just thoughts you think of as a child.”

Suzie said she began to dread going to school and showed classic signs of abuse like wetting the bed and having suicidal thoughts. The sexual abuse also ruined the relationship between Suzie and her father and brothers.

“I hated my brothers for simply being boys. I didn’t want (my father) to love me,” she said. “If I did what (Baldenebro) wanted and I allowed myself to be ‘loved,’ it would make him happy, but also, your mind goes into a survival mode so it doesn’t get worse.”

Suzie’s mom thought her daughter’s depression and anxiety were due to bullying at school. When she tried to speak with school administrators — Suzie’s mom only speaks Spanish, so her daughter had to be the translator — the principal and others blew her off. Ultimately, Suzie says she was transferred to another school, but under the label of suspension, which caused problems for her throughout the rest of her education.

‘A reassurance that I deserved it’

For years, Suzie didn’t tell anyone what Baldenebro had done. As more time passed, it began to feel like it was too late to tell anyone what had happened in her fourth-grade classroom, she said. But then a second incident happened at a family member’s house during a birthday party when she was about 12.

Suzie said she had fallen asleep on a couch in a guest room when one of the party guests — a teenage boy — began to touch her inappropriately.

“(I know) no one asks for it, but I was at the most lowest of my whole life because of that incident,” she said. “I blamed myself. I thought I’d asked for it. The second incident was a reassurance that I deserved it.”

It was only years after the second incident that Suzie confided what happened to a friend, who told her mother the story. Only then did she begin to recognize the damage childhood sexual abuse had caused, and seek help for her mental health.

“I’ve been abused multiple times,” she said, “but my (fourth) grade teacher, it felt like he completely violated me. He took away something I’ll never get back: my innocence.”

A loophole in the law

In suing her former school district, Suzie is seeking compensation for the years of abuse she says she suffered at the hands of Baldenebro and school administrators, who she accuses of doing nothing to protect her. But when the case went to trial last year, the defense discovered the second case of molestation and moved to introduce the evidence to the judge, arguing that the episode could have contributed to her psychological injuries.

The judge allowed it. Suzie’s legal team had to ultimately appeal to the California Supreme Court to get the evidence removed.

The Supreme Court found that the trial judge didn’t conduct a thorough enough hearing about whether the evidence would be relevant and that the trial court also failed to write an order stating exactly what evidence the defendant could introduce and what questions could be asked, according to an analysis of the case by Legal Newsline.

As of now, the testimony and evidence about Suzie’s second molestation could still be entered as evidence when the case goes back to court next March — especially since they still have the same trial judge on the case.

However, if Suzie’s Law is passed, the second incident of molestation would be inadmissible as evidence in the case against the school district.

Rape Shield Law protects Californians

SB 1386 would extend the state’s Rape Shield Law’s prohibition on entering evidence of a plaintiff’s past sexual conduct for purposes of attacking their credibility with a jury or judge.

Currently, a defendant in a rape case is not allowed to introduce evidence into a trial about the alleged victim’s past sexual conduct to prove that they consented to the sexual act, but they can introduce evidence about the victim’s sexual past to show their testimony is untrustworthy.

However, a child cannot consent to a sexual act, regardless of their sexual history, so examples of later abuse shouldn’t prove anything about a childhood abuse victim’s trustworthiness. Suzie’s Law would extend the current restrictions in the shield law and rework the language of the legal code around sexual battery cases involving a minor.

“I know what it’s like to go into a courtroom and talk to juries, and try to get the average, everyday person to understand how the legal system works,” said Sen. Caballero, who attended UCLA Law School and previously served as an attorney for California Rural Legal Assistance.

“The court made (its) decision based on the code section as it was written, and I thought that it was very cruel,” she said. “It flew in the face of our Rape Shield Law that has been on the books for a very long time.”

No one — including Suzie, who will be back in court come March — should have her unrelated sexual history thrown in her face as “evidence” against her abuse claims, or face arguments that her later abuse was somehow proof that she consented to the molestation at just 8 years old.

No child should go through what Suzie suffered, and no adult should be faced with the insulting defense tactics that she’s been forced to endure.

Our state must enshrine in its laws that brave people like Suzie can come forward to hold their abusers accountable in court without fear of retaliation or exposure. The bill will go to the governor’s desk next, and Gov. Gavin Newsom must sign this legislation to make sure all sexual abuse survivors in California are treated with dignity.