A FULL COURTROOM in Redwood City heard San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus defend herself in a bid to save her job on the last day of a hearing that could lead to her ouster.
The 10-day hearing ended with Corpus responding to over a week of testimony, in which she had heard more than a dozen witnesses accuse her of retaliating against those she perceived as disloyal, having a romantic relationship with her chief of staff, using racial and homophobic slurs, and neglecting her duties.
The administrative hearing was one of the final stages in the San Mateo County Board’s effort to remove Corpus. She remained defiant against calls for her resignation following the November 2024 release of a county-commissioned investigation conducted by retired judge LaDoris Cordell.
The 400-page report accused Corpus of a romantic involvement with her chief of staff, Victor Aenlle, and asserted that the pair fostered a culture of intimidation and retaliation in the Sheriff’s Office.
Instead of holding a recall election, the Board of Supervisors took the unprecedented step of putting a charter amendment, Measure A, on the ballot that would grant the Board the authority to remove Corpus. In March’s special election, voters overwhelmingly approved it.
Retired judge James Emerson was selected by both sides to oversee the hearing.
Corpus repeated what she had said from the start, that she was the victim of a “good ol’ boys club” in the Sheriff’s Office. She said her enemies have been resistant to the changes she has tried to incorporate through “21st century policing,” a modernized approach to law enforcement that prioritizes community engagement and officer wellness.
“It’s just people that want me out that are saying things about me,” Corpus said while fighting back tears.
She vehemently denied that she and Aenlle were more than just close friends. She defended her reasons for his hiring, saying that putting civilians in top positions is a part of contemporary policing.
“I hired him to follow the 21st century policing model,” Corpus said.
She also gave explanations for what the county’s legal team argued were examples of retaliation, such as arresting sheriff’s union president Carlos Tapia, trying to fire former assistant sheriff Ryan Monaghan, and transferring Capt. Brian Philip and Lt. Jonathan Sebring to corrections.
Tapia’s arrest, which occurred just hours before the Board of Supervisors released the Cordell report on Nov. 12, 2024, sparked controversy and allegations of retaliation since Tapia was a leading voice against Corpus.
Corpus said that she “was very cautious” about how to proceed, and that former assistant sheriff Fox told her that not arresting Tapia could reflect poorly on her. According to Fox’s testimony, he repeatedly said there was “overwhelming evidence” of timecard fraud.
“He told me that if I didn’t do it, how would that look to our constituents?” Corpus said.
Faith and fate at stake
When Corpus’ attorney Thomas Mazzucco asked her why she has continued to resist calls for her resignation, she talked about her desire to continue bringing change to the Sheriff’s Office.
“Your Honor, I would not compromise my integrity, my oath of office, for anyone or anything,” Corpus said while getting emotional. “God has me here for a reason, and I will continue to fight for the people that have elected me.”
Corpus took a five-minute break to compose herself before Jan Little, an attorney for the county, cross-examined her
Little tried digging into Corpus, confronting the Sheriff with her “list of liars,” Little said.
Little named several witnesses who testified against Corpus, including Philip, Monaghan, Sgt. Jimmy Chan, former captain Rebecca Albin, and former friend and colleague Valerie Barnes.
Corpus called each of them either “liars” or “dishonest.”
At lunch recess, Emerson asked for a copy of the Cordell report, the investigation that Corpus’ defense attorneys believe misled voters in the special election for Measure A.
The Cordell report itself has no legal basis and cannot be held up in a court of law, a fact that Corpus’ attorney Tom Perez focused on in closing statements.
“It is not worth the paper it’s written on,” Perez said to Emerson. “The reason it’s not in evidence is it’s a piece of … I don’t want to say that.”
Attorney for the county, Franco Muzzio, kicked off Friday closing statements at 1 p.m. He went over each of the most notable allegations that if true, could be grounds for removal.
“The evidence in this case against Sheriff Christina Corpus is compelling, overwhelming, and deeply troubling,” Muzzio said. “The sheriff has repeatedly violated her duty to uphold the law and protect the law.”
With the passage of Measure A, the county was granted temporary power to remove a sheriff for “cause,” which includes violating any law related to the performance of the sheriff’s duties, flagrant or repeated neglect of duty, misappropriation of public funds or property, willful falsification of official statements or documents, or obstruction of a lawful investigation into the sheriff or the Sheriff’s Office, according to Section 412.5 of the county charter.
For the county, proving to Emerson that Corpus either retaliated against members of the Sheriff’s Office, had a close relationship with Aenlle, or neglected performing her duties is essential if the Board wants to remove her from office.
The courtroom went quiet, eyes glued to the court television screen as Muzzio showed a slide presentation displaying bullet points of the most significant allegations and highlights from witness testimony.
At one point, Tapia’s booking log document from jail was displayed, featuring his mugshot.
Muzzio also showed on the screen an email that Corpus and Aenlle sent to the supervisors Noelia Corzo and Ray Mueller just hours before the release of the Cordell report.
The email contained a statement that suggested Corpus and Aenlle were trying to discredit Tapia as a witness in the Cordell report, thus weakening the evidentiary value of Tapia’s testimony in Cordell’s investigation.
“You should be advised that Mr. Tapia’s reputation for honesty and reliability have come under law enforcement scrutiny,” the email read.
Muzzio argued that the email is evidence that Corpus tried to obstruct an investigation into the Sheriff’s Office.
“The Sheriff and Mr. Aenlle knew the Cordell report was set for release following a 4 p.m. press conference on Nov. 12,” Muzzio said. “Arresting Deputy Tapia that day at 1 p.m. gave them just enough time to send an email to supervisors Mueller and Corzo attempting to discredit the Cordell report.”
Proving that Corpus had a conflict of interest with Aenlle helps support the claim that she misused the county’s coffers, since she repeatedly requested raises in his salary.
“The law prohibits using public resources to benefit a close personal assistant,” Muzzio said. “Whether the relationship was romantic or not does not make a difference under the law. What matters is that it was intimate enough, emotionally and personally, that it created a clear conflict of interest.”
Culture change at center of closing
Perez gave a passionate speech during closing statements.
He argued that both Sheriff’s Office personnel and members of the Board have campaigned for her removal due to personal disdain for Corpus and her focus on changing the culture in the Sheriff’s Office.
“When you’re trying to do culture change, it ain’t easy,” Perez said. “The sheriff scored a remarkable victory in the primary election, and from that day forward, they went after her.”
He also believes that her opponents conspired against her with a pre-determined outcome in the removal process.
“They had an outcome in mind that was reverse-engineered, and the first way they did that was the Cordell report,” Perez said.
Perez urged Emerson to thoroughly review testimonies and evidence before coming to a decision.
“She made history in 2022, and they are in their intent on reversing history,” Perez said in a raised voice. “The one thing they don’t control in this process is what you do, your honor.”
Emerson will have up to 45 calendar days to send a written recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The recommendation must contain an opinion on whether there are grounds for removal.
“The decision will be left to my hand,” Emerson said as he concluded the Friday hearing.
