Sheriff Corpus defends her actions in nearly 7 hours of testimony

San Mateo County sheriff unflinching in defending her actions

San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus was the sole witness for day two of her removal hearing. The Sheriff was unwavering in responding to accusations by the county of inappropriate and unethical conduct. Corpus described a sexist workplace and responded to each allegation in detail.

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. - San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus took the stand for a second day in her removal hearing, responding to questions from county attorneys and her own defense team about allegations that she used intimidation and retaliation against staff, and favoritism towards her close friend Victor Aenlle, a civilian who received a high-paying post as her Chief of Staff overseeing sworn officers.

Was it favoritism?

What we know:

"What the county is alleging is she gave the benefits to her chief of staff because of her relationship, not because of his work and that's a big part of this case," Steven Clark, former Santa Clara County District Attorney, said.

County attorneys questioned Corpus about whether Aenlle bought her an $8,000 pair of diamond earrings, showing the judge text messages between Corpus and a friend who wrote Corpus should "Show her sparkles," and be careful that Corpus's husband would not quote "find you and VA," adding "enjoy being spoiled and doted on, you deserve to be happy."

Corpus said she bought the earrings herself with cash.

Her defense team asked her, "Did you ever have a romantic relationship with Mr. Aenlle?" Corpus said "No."

Trip to Hawaii

Corpus testified that a trip to Hawaii was for a family wedding, and that Aenlle accompanied her on the flight to help with Corpus's autistic 14-year-old son who is 6-feet tall and needs assistance. Corpus said her son knew and trusted Aenlle.

"He (Aenlle) was going to do executive protection for a high-net client," Corpus testified.

"When you were there in Hawaii did you see Mr. Aenlle?" her defense attorney Tom Perez said.

"I saw him once. We met for coffee," Corpus replied.

Job reassignments

The county questioned Corpus about repeated job reassignments for deputies who were critical of her.

Corpus said all of the job changes were due to staffing shortages or vacancies due to promotions. She testified that she had promoted many of her critics because she saw they did good work.

She said Sgt. Carlos Acosta, the union president and fierce critic, was reassigned to the jail because a supervisor reported Acosta was often absent from the court security job due to his union duties.

"She makes a great witness. She's very well-prepared. She knows the material, and she comes off genuine. At the same time, she comes off believable. I thought she did very well," Clark said.

Use of racial slurs?

The county questioned Sheriff Corpus about allegations of using racial slurs about a female staff member and the prior sheriff.

County attorney: "Have you ever used an ethnic slur to refer to her Jewish heritage?"
Corpus: "No."

County attorney: "Have you ever used an ethnic slur about Sheriff Bolanos?
Corpus: "No. I have never used an ethnic slur about Sheriff Bolanos..."

County attorney: "Have you ever used the N word?"
Corpus: "Never."

Corpus also denied knowing about the meaning of a term she used that is considered to be a pejorative term for lesbians.

"I think she took some hits on that issue", Clark said, adding that it was hard to believe she didn't know the term. "The question will be does that rise to the level of cause to remove her from office."

Her reasons for hiring Aenlle

The other side:

The defense asked Corpus to testify about her challenges as a working mom with a special needs child, who overcame a sexist workplace and was being undermined by union members for trying to change the workplace culture.

Corpus defended her decision to hire Aenlle, saying, "He (Aenlle) believed in what my vision was for the organization."

Her attorneys said the hearing is very different from civil proceedings, and the defense might not be allowed to call witnesses on their list if those witnesses have already testified.

"The standard of proof, which is only a preponderance of evidence, is extremely low for something this severe. In contrast, the civil grand jury proceeding...requires proof by a jury beyond reasonable doubt," Wilson Leung, an attorney on Corpus's legal team, said.

Corpus is expected to take the stand again on Wednesday for day three of the hearing.

Featured