On Oct. 4, 2017, plaintiff Marcus Stewart, a juvenile ward of the Los Angeles County Probation Department, was in his locked juvenile hall room when he requested the use of a Bluetooth speaker, which was connected to a probation officer’s phone, so that he could play music while he exercised. Marcus claimed that instead of placing the speaker in his hand, the officer tried to press the speaker toward his genital area and rub it. Marcus claimed that the officer did the same thing the following night and then attempted to grab him. He claimed that the officer sexually assaulted him and that when he complained about the sexual assault, he was retaliated against by the other probation officers. Marcus sued the probation officers’ employers, Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles County Probation Department; the chief probation officers, Terri McDonald and Sheila Mitchell; the senior probation officer, Robert White; and the deputy probation officers, Tyler Chamberlain, Anthony Carpenter, Hiep Nguyen, Javier Roman and Officer Gonzalez (whose first name was unknown). Marcus alleged that one officer’s actions constituted sexual assault and that several of the other officers’ actions constituted assault and battery. He also alleged that the officers’ actions constituted violations of his civil and constitutional rights and that the chief probation officers, the senior probation officer, the county and the probation department all negligently supervised the deputy probation officers, making them liable for the deputy probation officers’ actions. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that on Oct. 4, 2007, Marcus asked to use the Bluetooth speaker, but that instead of placing the speaker in Marcus’s hand, the officer pressed the speaker toward Marcus’s genital area and then tried to rub the speaker against Marcus’s genitals. Counsel also contended that the officer did the same thing the following night, when Marcus again asked to use the speaker. However, counsel maintained that, this time, the officer lingered in Marcus’s room and then grabbed Marcus’s genitals. Marcus claimed that he rebuffed the officer during the incidents and that when he complained about the officer’s actions, the officer denied the incidents. He also claimed he was retaliated against for making his complaints. Marcus alleged that on Oct. 7, 2017, the assaulting officer approached him, and offered him contraband snacks and the use of his cell phone to encourage him to remain quiet. He claimed the officer also told him that he did not want to get caught and that he wished they could set him free, but they cannot. Defense counsel contended that there was no visual evidence that corroborated Marcus’s allegations. However, counsel noted that upon a review of video recordings, various officers, including the one identified by Marcus, were observed using cellphones and/or electronic devices in violation of department policy. Since the use of such devices impede officers’ attention when they are supposed to be supervising their assigned juvenile wards, all the identified officers received corrective action appropriate for each circumstance., Marcus claimed that he suffers from emotional distress as a result of the incidents. Marcus sought recovery of damages for his emotional pain and suffering.