This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

Five California correctional officers who were accused of sexually assaulting incarcerated people over the last dozen years remain employed by the state, according to a new audit from the state prisons’ inspector general.

The audit, released last week, is a twice-a-year summary of how the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation addresses complaints about its staff members. Overall, the inspector general found fault with the internal affairs department’s investigations into prison guard misconduct.

The audit labeled 86% of the prison system’s internal affairs disciplinary and criminal caseload as “inadequate” or “needs improvement” — only 14% of the cases handled by the internal affairs department were rated “adequate.” Inadequate means there were significant problems with the investigation that affected its final outcome. The less-serious label, “needs improvement,” meant that the process had problems, but none so serious that they compromised the investigation.

It comes as the department faces what the report called “a wave” of lawsuits from incarcerated and formerly incarcerated women who allege they were sexually abused by prison staff. The audit said at least 279 women have sued the department, and they have accused at least 83 prison employees of sexual misconduct.

The inspector general report does not include the names of the officers or even identify the prisons where they work, which is in keeping with its past disciplinary audits. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation did not immediately return calls and emails seeking comment for this story.

California has two prisons that primarily house women. At the larger prison, the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla, former guard Gregory Rodriguez was found guilty of 64 counts of sexual abuse in January, The Fresno Bee reported, and later sentenced to 224 years in prison.

Thirteen incarcerated or formerly incarcerated women testified against him. A 2023 investigation by The Guardian found that women had made reports about Rodriguez as early as 2014. He worked at the prison until 2022.

As Rodriguez’s case unfolded, the inspector general’s office learned of other sex assault lawsuits. The inspector general’s office in the new report said it looked at 68 cases and it faulted prison lawyers for being too slow in referring names to internal investigators who could have developed disciplinary cases against officers.

On average, the audit said it took nine months for the corrections department’s legal staff to send cases to internal investigators. “Delayed investigation of sexual assault significantly impairs the integrity and effectiveness of the investigative process,” the audit said.

The audit then described three cases involving six officers, five of whom continue to work for state prisons.

In a separate case not connected to the “wave” of lawsuits, internal investigators took so long to review allegations of sexual assault that a lieutenant accused by a dozen women was able to retire before facing discipline, the audit said.

The inspector general’s office wrote that the officer allegedly traded chewing gum, a radio and marijuana for sexual favors between 2021 and 2023, and then lied to the prison system’s internal affairs unit when asked about it.

The internal affairs unit “unnecessarily delayed the completion of the investigation, which prevented the department from imposing discipline for some allegations,” the audit found.

Other violations ranged from minor administrative chicanery, like two guards who allegedly faked the numbers in a prisoner count so they could use the time to eat Thanksgiving dinner instead, to allegations that a prison guard loudly, publicly and untruthfully indicated to other inmates that a prisoner was acting as an informant.

The audit reflects a chaotic process for even routine investigations. In a January 2024 case, one of eight prison guards who had broken up a fight struck an incarcerated person with a baton, even though the incarcerated person had already “disengaged.”

The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was aware of the case in January 2024, according to the lawsuit, but didn’t refer it to internal affairs until June 2024, according to the audit. An investigator didn’t start conducting interviews until August 2024. Then the case was reassigned to a second investigator, who didn’t start interviews until November 2024, and tried to close the case without interviewing the incarcerated person, the guard who allegedly struck him or any witnesses.

Then, the second investigator went on extended leave, handing the case off to a third investigator who had weeks to wrap up an investigation that is supposed to take months to complete. Ultimately, the prison system was handed a case four days before the deadline for disciplinary action with “a wholly deficient investigative report.”