FOLSOM, Calif. — A former Folsom police officer is suing the city for discrimination and harassment he allegedly faced within the department before his January 2022 firing.
James Dorris filed a civil complaint Sept. 6 alleging he constantly endured multiple incidents of racism and harassment including slurs, mockery and inappropriate write-ups during his 17 years with the department.
The lawsuit doesn't explicitly say why he was fired, but it mentions the police chief’s office filing a complaint with the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office in 2020 to pursue a criminal charge against him based on an unauthorized use of the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System.
“In March of 2021, we received a case from the Folsom Police Department alleging that James Dorris misused the CLETS system,” said Assistant District Attorney Michael Blazina in a statement to ABC10. “In January of 2022, we rejected filing charges due to insufficient evidence.”
Dorris, an Asian male, was hired in July 2005. The lawsuit alleges he was one of two Asian officers out of its more than 80 employees from 2005-2022.
Folsom’s population is approximately 19.7% Asian, according to United States Census Bureau data.
Dorris says he endured constant comments using Asian stereotypes with some referencing his appearance. The complaint says a number of them came directly from his predominant supervisor.
The lawsuit describes some of the situations Dorris felt were discriminatory, including incidents in 2007 and 2008 where fellow officers allegedly placed anti-Asian stickers onto his locker.
“They would have a quote written on them saying, ‘I’m Officer Dorris,’” the lawsuit says. “Of particular concern was a posting on his locker portraying an Asian man appearing to (run) for his life while being shot in the head during the fall of Saigon during the nation’s Vietnam conflict from the 1960s and 1970s.”
Dorris alleges supervisors would mock him with slurs and accents. In one instance, Dorris says he asked for clarification of instructions in a shooting course and a sergeant responded by pretending to speak an Asian language. The lawsuit says the sergeant then asked: “Understand now?”
Then, between 2019 and 2020, Dorris says his predominant supervisor “would see an Asian name on the arrest board” and ask, “How do you pronounce that, Dorris?”
The lawsuit alleges Dorris was written up numerous times due to bias while non-minority officers were involved in multiple situations that would have resulted in demotion, suspension or termination “had disciplinary action and decision been made in a non-discriminatory manner.”
The lawsuit says:
White male officers operated golf carts under the influence of alcohol at multiple charity events, resulting in serious physical injury including broken arms, a broken back, a skull fracture and life-flight ambulance transport.
Four officers engaged in a conspiracy to receive paid sexual favors at alleged massage parlors. One officer would keep watch when another engaged in the illicit activity, documents said. This incident was investigated and two officers were terminated while one was promoted to commander, the suit says. The complaint alleges the promoted officer had a personal relationship with the officer assigned to lead the investigation.
A white female officer engaged in a conspiracy attempting to steal 400 hours of paid time off from the department. She was caught, court documents allege, and the crime was reduced from 400 hours to 40 hours. She was later promoted, the suit claims.
The department investigated complaints of unfair treatment by senior officers against other minority and female officers; the complaint was allegedly joined by roughly 30 officers. Upon completion of the investigation, the officer who initially filed the complaint “was told he was the problem.”
Dorris alleges new sergeants served disciplinary notices and engaged in daily harassment of a female Asian officer in 2019 and — in one case during a shooting exercise — kicked her feet, grabbed her by the ankles and dragged her several feet across the dirt.
The lawsuit also alleges Folsom police officers discriminated against an Asian bar owner during the COVID shut down.
“...During the COVID shut down, all of the bars remained open at some point contrary to public health orders,” court documents said. “However, the department only attempted to enforce legal restrictions against the Asian bar owner, leaving the others completely alone.”
Separate from racial incidents, the documents allege an off-duty, female senior officer made sexual advances toward Dorris in summer 2007 while he was on patrolling duty at the sports bar she attended.
“(He) prayed that one day the lieutenant or chief would say or do something to eradicate the conduct,” the lawsuit said. "He feared that he would be segregated and retaliated against if he tried to raise any concerns.”
The Folsom Police Department declined to comment on pending litigation.
The Folsom Police Officers’ Association also did not respond to a request for comment.
The city of Folsom released a statement about the lawsuit:
“This is a retaliatory lawsuit filed by a former Folsom police officer who was terminated for misconduct,” the statement said. “The lawsuit was filed after misconduct was sustained and the termination upheld by an independent arbitrator. Regardless, the city of Folsom does not tolerate any form of discrimination or harassment and takes the allegations seriously. The claims of discrimination contained in Mr. Dorris’ complaint are false and do not accurately reflect the character of the hard-working men and women in the Folsom Police Department serving and protecting the public each and every day. The city values the diverse background and inclusivity of all its employees.”
The city provided ABC10 with a copy of the arbitrator’s report. In it, the arbitrator doesn't confirm if Dorris illegally used the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, but says Dorris did drive by the house of his current girlfriend’s ex-boyfriend.
The arbitrator said the illegal use of the telecommunications system would not be “sufficient” to uphold the termination, but after texts between Dorris and his girlfriend revealed discriminatory comments Dorris made toward Black people, the arbitrator ruled his termination was justified because the "damage to his effectiveness and the city has been done."
The documents mention a third incident of “serious misconduct,” but it was unclear what the third item was because the report is heavily redacted.
All parts of the document surrounding dishonesty by a police officer are available to the public under California Senate Bill 1421.
Dorris allegedly made "egregious racially charged statements, at least one of which was done on-duty, which undermine his effectiveness as a police officer in addition to the department’s reputation,” the ruling said.
WATCH MORE: Sacramento's nightlife economy manager speaks to city council on how to improve business, safety
