Los Angeles-based independent investigative journalist Cece Woods has been a thorn in the side of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department since at least 2018, when she exposed a law enforcement cover-up of a string of murders in and around Malibu Creek State Park. Since then she’s also reported on corruption in LA County government, and her reporting on Biden FAA Administrator nominee Phil Washington’s corruption when he was head of LA Metro was key to that nomination’s failure.
Clearly, even if you’ve never heard her name, she’s a force to be reckoned with – and current LA County Sheriff Robert Luna is going to extreme lengths, including threatened lawfare, to attempt to silence her.
Luna was elected in 2022 after a contentious election in which members of the LA County Board of Supervisors and then-District Attorney George Gascon collaborated to push him over the finish line because they didn’t like that the incumbent, Alex Villanueva, was pursuing public corruption cases. He’s therefore up for re-election in 2026. Over the last few months, Woods tells RedState, there were persistent rumors that Luna wouldn’t pursue re-election and might even step down from his job due to health concerns – and several credible sources, who Woods had relied on in the past, told her those concerns related to Parkinson’s disease.
While working on a full story, Woods posted about the rumors on X:
There was very little pushback at the time – just a reply to her post from Jeffrey Millman, a prominent Democrat strategist who advised Luna’s 2022 campaign, then a story in the LA Times a day later that repeated Woods’ post and Millman’s denial. The author of that piece, Keri Blakinger, replied to Woods on X that the rumor “was circulating pretty widely.”
Nobody from Luna’s office contacted her to say that he didn’t have any health issues, or that the rumors were false, or to ask for a retraction, Woods said, until December 11, when she received a five-page intimidation and threat letter from self-proclaimed “rabid defender of stars in trouble” attorney Martin Singer on Luna’s behalf.
Intimidation Letter
The letter, obtained exclusively by RedState, begins (emphasis original):
Our firm is litigation counsel to Los Angeles Sheriff, Robert G. Luna. I write regarding the outrageous defamatory statement you made on your public “X” account page on November 10, 2024 in which you stated that my client is suffering from Parkinson’s disease and suggested he is unable to perform his obligations due to the effects of the disease (the “Statement”). Be advised that your assertion, even by implication, is highly defamatory and has exposed you, and all those involved in this conduct, to very substantial liability.
We demand that you immediately remove the Statement from your X page, demand that you immediately cease and desist from posting and/or disseminating any further false statements about my client, including without limitation any statements accusing my client of suffering from diseases that impact his professional obligations and/or presenting my client in a false light, and demand that you immediately post a Correction on your public “X” account page stating Sheriff Robert G. Luna is not suffering from Parkinson’s Disease and does not need to step down as the Sheriff. Should you ignore this demand, you will be exposing yourself to significant legal liability.
Any journalist, especially an independent journalist without the financial backing of a large publication, would be shocked and a bit frightened to receive such a letter, and possibly intimidated into not reporting on that subject anymore – which is likely Luna’s intent.
Singer starts off by misstating what Woods said, accusing her of stating that Luna is suffering from Parkinson’s disease and suggesting that Luna “is unable to perform his obligations due to the effects of the disease.”
She said that he could potentially step down due to health concerns that multiple sources say is Parkinson’s disease. Nowhere does she say or insinuate that he “is unable to perform his obligations.”
“NEW: Rumors have been heavily circulating throughout @LASDHQ and @LBPD that @LACoSheriff could potentially step down as the head of the largest sheriff’s department in the country due to health concerns (multiple sources say Parkinson’s disease).”
Singer goes on to poorly “lawsplain” what he believes Woods’ legal exposure is, citing only certain portions of defamation law and completely ignoring exceptions that clearly pertain to this situation.
Then, he demands that Woods post a declarative statement she cannot possibly stand behind, namely that Luna does not have Parkinson’s disease. How would she know that? She hasn’t seen Luna’s medical records, and no records were attached to Singer’s letter. Next, he demands that Woods “issue a Correction on your public X account page stating that my client…does not need to step down as the sheriff.” Neither Singer or Luna can demand that Woods express such an opinion if she doesn’t share it.
Finally, the letter ends with a threat of litigation.
If this matter is not promptly resolved to our client’s satisfaction, we will protect and enforce our client’s substantial rights and remedies against you to the fullest extent permitted by the law.
Given that you now have been placed on formal notice of the false and defamatory nature of your claims regarding my client, any other false and defamatory statements you may issue about my client will supply further evidence of constitutional malice, will support an award of punitive damages, and will greatly increase the liability you already face for your tortious conduct.
Recall that in the first paragraph of the letter Singer wrote that publishing this statement “has exposed [Woods], and all those involved in this conduct, to very substantial liability.” Later in the letter, Singer cites a number of defamation cases with issues related to the credibility of sources; it seems that Luna’s possibly angling to get Woods to reveal her sources as means of defending herself.
Julie Hamill, principal attorney at California Policy Center, told RedState that Luna’s got a steep hill to climb should he decide to file suit against Woods:
[A]s a public official, Luna must prove that Cece acted with actual malice– knowing that the statements were false or recklessly disregarding their falsity.
California has strong anti-SLAPP laws. “SLAPP” is a “strategic lawsuit against public participation,” and they are used against people like Cece who speak out on issues of public interest. Mr. Singer appears to be threatening to file a SLAPP suit for defamation against Cece in his letter.
To challenge a SLAPP suit in California, defendants must show that they are being sued for “any act . . . in furtherance of the person’s right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16 (2019). Statements made in a place open to the public or a public forum in connection with an issue of public interest, and any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of free speech or petition rights in connection with “a public issue or an issue of public interest” are covered under the statute. § 425.16(e).
The beauty of anti-SLAPP laws is that the prevailing defendant in an anti-SLAPP motion is automatically entitled to recover their attorney’s fees and costs.
Krista Baughman of Dhillon Law Group (who represented me when I was sued by Katie Hill after publishing a series of stories detailing Hill’s sexual harassment of a staffer and concerns about alcohol and prescription drug use), said it would be very difficult for Luna to meet the “actual malice” standard, telling RedState:
Where a journalist publishes reports she receives from multiple sources, it will be extraordinarily difficult for a public official to meet the constitutional actual malice standard, which requires proof that the journalist acted recklessly or with knowledge of falsity. Cases like this are routinely stricken in California by way of anti-SLAPP motions.
Family Ties
It’s interesting to note that Luna’s daughter, Cesie Alvarez, was hired by Lavely & Singer a year ago. It’s unclear at this point whether Luna has privately retained Singer and is paying market rates (Singer’s hourly rate was reported at $850 in 2016, and that’s undoubtedly markedly increased since then), or if he got his daughter to compose this letter and have her boss put his name to it, or if he’s getting a discounted “friends and family” rate (which could introduce ethical issues for Luna under California’s Political Reform Act), or if the county is paying for Singer’s services in targeting a journalist exercising her First Amendment rights.
Prior to working at Lavely & Singer, Alvarez worked for Miller Barondess, a law firm that represents Luna and the LA County Board of Supervisors in a lawsuit filed by former Sheriff Alex Villanueva.
Singer earned his reputation as a bulldog attorney by representing clients such as Bill Cosby, Charlie Sheen, Brett Ratner, and David Blaine.
Woods’ Reaction
Woods isn’t backing down. She tells RedState:
I am blown away by Sheriff Luna’s attempt to intimidate and silence me with the threat of a lawsuit. What’s even more reprehensible is the Sheriff running to his daughter’s law firm to facilitate this evil threat. I reported what was being told to me by members of the department’s executive staff and rank and file as well members of Luna’s former department. As with everything I write, I have the documentation and credible sources to back up my reporting. The posts in question were reported exactly as the information was provided to me and supported publicly by others privy to the same information. There was absolutely no malice whatsoever. This is a pathetic attempt to silence independent journalists.
