Mayor Sam Exclusive: "Jose Luis Huizar's 2005 Lie to Pasadena PD" exposes his "Santa Ana, California Namesake"



In a Mayor Sam Exclusive, documentation provided by the Pasadena Police Department via a California Public Records Act Request, reveals that a "Jose Luis Huizar" lied to investigators about his true identity, upon initial questioning in an alleged 2005 Sexual Assault at the Burke Williams Spa ........., or not?  

Is above the "Santa Ana Jose Luis Huizar", the "El Sereno Jose Luis Huizar" ....., or both?

 The Burke Williams Spa in Old Town Pasadena.

** Blogger's Note: In response to our California Public Records Act Request to the Pasadena Police Department regarding an alleged 2005 Sexual Assault involving current CD 14 City Councilman Jose Huizar at an Old Town Spa (as reported on previously by the LA Times James Rainey), we received in response, the following "Summery" from Records Administrator Alicia Patterson, which we post for disclosure and review. Its readily apparent upon initial review, that then LAUSD School Board President Jose Huizar (who was also running to replace just-elected Mayor Antonio Villar, as CD 14 City Councilman), attempted to lie (or mislead) about his identity to Pasadena PD Investigators, by giving them a "1819 N. Alona, Santa Ana California" address in the first two reports, as noted in the "Summery" below. But property records for the "1819 N Alona, Santa Ana California Residence" do indeed show a "Jose Luis Huizar" as owner, rising more questions (especially regarding the property's 2006 fiscal transactions), than answering, involving this 2005 Incident as we continue below---Scott Johnson.  

To me  

CC PD_RecSupv@cityofpasadena.net  

Feb 11 
Pursuant to Government Code § 6254(f), this information is provided pursuant to your January 21, 2015 public records request:
• Suspect: ** Jose Huizar, 1819 N. Alona, Santa Ana (listed in April 29, 2005 and June 14, 2005 reports), and ** Jose Luis Huizar 4903 Calandria Way, Los Angeles (listed in September 8, 2005 and November 2, 2005 reports). No arrests are noted.
• Witness (excluding victim): Olivia Jobe, Burke Williams Spa employee (not the victim).
• Date, time, and location of incident: April 9, 2005, approximately 9:15 p.m., Burke Williams Spa, 39 Mills Place, Pasadena.
• Dates of police reports: April 29, 2005 (original report), June 14, 2005, September 8, 2005, and November 2, 2005 (add reports).
• Factual circumstances: The victim, then 28, reported the incident on April 18, 2005. The victim alleged she was giving a massage to the suspect, and the suspect grabbed the victim’s legs during the massage and attempted to pull her toward the massage table. Additionally, at the conclusion of the massage, the suspect grabbed the victim’s leg, arm, and breast.
No additional information can be provided to you in accordance with the decision in Haynie v. Superior Court, (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1061, 1072
Alicia Patterson
Records Administrator

Picture of the Massage Facilities at the Burke Williams Spa.

In November of 2005, the "Jose Luis Huizar of 4903 La Calandria Way", with the blessing endorsement of the newest "Political Rock Star" Mayor Antonio Villar(then also raigosa), won in convincing fashion, the CD 14 City Council Special Election, outpolling the likes of former City Councilman Nick Pacheco, then CD 1 Staffer Ruby De Vera, 1984 Olympics Boxing Gold Medalist Paul Gonzalez and others.

But while the now "CD 14 City Councilman Jose Luis Huizar" was looking forward to a 2006 Better Political Tomorrow, the alleged 28 year victim employee of the Burke Williams Spa was facing harassment of another type as the LA Times reported.

About a year after the alleged incident, the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing received a complaint against Burke Williams and four of its employees, a spokeswoman for the agency said.

According to a heavily redacted copy of the complaint, it accused Burke Williams and the employees of harassment, retaliation and other violations of state law. The complaint cited an incident on April 9, 2005 — the date of the alleged sexual battery.

The agency issued a routine "right to sue" letter, which doesn't judge a case's merits but is required for plaintiffs who want to file a civil suit alleging employment discrimination. The Times could find no record of a related lawsuit.

Not to be forgotten is the "1819 Alona, Santa Ana California, Jose Luis Huizar". In 1992, "Jose Luis Huizar" bought the 1819 Alona Santa Ana Property for $116,000 via a Loan from the former Home Savings and Loans of America. In January od 2003, Jose Luis Huizar and a Susan Huizar take out a first in a series of Refinancing Loans, for $260,000. Then in 2006, they take out two other loans for $252,000 in March and $461,000 in December. 

The 1819 Alona Street, Santa Ana California Combine Property Report.

Late in 2006, its apparent from the Times Report that the alleged victim would not go forward with either pressing for charges against the now "CD 14 City Councilman Jose Luis Huizar", the "1819 Alona Street, Santa Ana California Jose Luis Huizar", or suit employer Burke Williams for pressuring her not to do such ......., and the reasoning?

** From the Times, The prosecutor Connie Orozco said she was contacted at the time by Steve Escovar, an attorney she knew who was representing Huizar. She said Escovar told her that Huizar was a good man and that the attorney believed the complainant did not want to proceed with a prosecution. Escovar did not respond to requests for comment.

** Again from the Times, Orozco said the massage therapist worried that she would suffer consequences at work and might lose her job at Burke Williams if she pursued her complaint. "It rings in my mind that she said they were not supportive in the least and they were encouraging her not to report this," Orozco said. "I told her this was not a reason to not go forward … when she was victimized."

** Thus .........., In most such cases, "if you say you don't want to prosecute it, as the complaining witness, you sort of have that power," Orozco said. "The victim in this case preferred it not go forward, and it did not." (for an undisclosed material reason?).

In closing, could have some "undisclosed material reasons" played roles in these later events affecting either "The 1819 Alona Street Jose Luis Huizar", "The Now CD 14 Councilman Jose Luis Huizar" or both? Considering ......;
First, "Jose Luis Huizar and Susan Huizar" lost their 1819 Alona Street Resident in a 2009 "Quitclaim"

Document of Quitclaim against "Jose Luis Huizar".

And in 2013, now Embattled CD 14 City Councilman Jose Luis Huizar, almost losing his 4903 La Calandria Way Residenal Property for non-payment of Property Taxes?



"Jose Luis Huizar and Richelle Rios Huizar's" House Auction Listing.

Your thoughts ..............

Scott Johnson in CD 14