COLUMBUS — Two former employees of the Hocking County Prosecutor’s office have filed another amended version of their federal sex discrimination lawsuit against the county and former prosecutor Ryan Black, adding some new specific allegations.
These include the claim that while Black was serving as prosecutor, his alleged mistreatment of women went beyond his employees to also affect female crime victims his office was supposed to be protecting. They also include an allegation that when one of the plaintiffs in the suit complained about Black’s harassment and intimidation to two Hocking County Sheriff’s officers they refused to help her, fearing reprisals from the prosecutor.
This makes the third version of a complaint that was originally filed in February, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.
In their suit, plaintiffs Kate Ricketts and Kelsey Vanscyoc, who worked in victim advocacy for the prosecutor’s office, lodge a variety of allegations against Black. These include claims that Black subjected the two, and other women who worked for him, to an incessant stream of degrading, sexually loaded comments and behavior; coerced Vanscyoc into having sex with him; denied the two overtime pay when they worked over 40 hours a week, and when they complained about his behavior, punished them by making their work environment so unbearable that they felt compelled to resign.
The defendants have replied to the lawsuit, denying that Vanscyoc and Ricketts were discriminated against because they are female, or effectively forced to resign, and asking that a number of individual claims in the suit be dismissed. This request for dismissal has itself been dismissed, because the filing of the new amended complaint renders it moot. The defense can still file a motion seeking dismissal of the new version.
According to the motion asking for leave to file the new complaint, it “adds and/or clarifies additional allegations regarding Defendants’ deprivation of employment and reputational interest caused by the discriminatory, retaliatory course of conduct designed to intimidate and demean them to impugn their reputation, and undermine their employment interest by such acts to constructively discharge them from their employment.”
The new version of the suit reproduces most of an earlier amended version, but adds around 30 paragraphs containing new allegations, or information expanding on earlier claims.
The suit had already alleged that Black — who resigned effective April 19 — frequently referred to women in vulgar and degrading terms, and discriminated against women working in his office. The newly amended complaint adds some supporting details — such as that Black and other employees of the office referred to one of the plaintiffs as “the office bitch.” It also, however, claims that Black’s bad attitude toward women extended to female crime victims as well.
“During plaintiffs’ employment, defendant Black constantly referred to women in foul and derogatory terms… including, but not limited to, plaintiffs, other female staff, other county employees and officials, and even victims of crimes he was responsible to prosecute,” the new complaint alleges. “(He) failed to vigorously pursue the prosecution of crimes on behalf of domestic violence victims because of his condescending, misogynist attitude toward women.”
The earlier version of the suit mentions a Feb. 7, 2023 incident in which Black allegedly screamed at Vanscyoc. The latest version expands on this somewhat, alleging that on that date Black “verbally attacked plaintiff Vanscyoc in the courtroom of Common Pleas Judge Jason Despetorich, throwing down his briefcase, while yelling at her that he was ‘the prosecutor and you’re just a f---ing advocate’ in the presence of several defense attorneys, defendants, victims and court staff.” After the incident was brought to the judge’s attention, it adds, Despetorich “subsequently discussed courtroom demeanor with Black.”
Vanscyoc complained about the incident to an assistant prosecutor and an investigator in the prosecutor’s office, but nothing was done, the complaint says. She then met with Caleb Moritz, who was then chief deputy at the sheriff’s office, and another sheriff’s officer, to report Black’s behavior, but they “refused to assist her because of fear of retaliation by defendant Black.”
The lawsuit has raised questions of whether there are sufficient policies and protocols in place to allow employees facing behavior from their superiors like that alleged against Black to safely report it and have it dealt with.
The latest version of the lawsuit adds some material relevant to this issue, noting that each of the plaintiffs had on her work computer a digital version of the Policy Handbook for Employees of Hocking County. But when they raised issues with Black “concerning terms or conditions of employment,” the complaint alleges, he “instructed them and other employees that the policies contained in the aforementioned handbook did not apply to employees of the prosecutor.”
It adds that while Vanscyoc and Ricketts were working for the prosecutor’s office, they “were never given or advised of any personnel policies or procedures describing their rights to complain of sexual harassment or discrimination, nor were they informed of procedures or protocols for complaining of sexual harassment or dscrimination.”
In addition to the federal lawsuit, Black is also facing possible disciplinary action by the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct. On April 3 the high court’s Disciplinary Counsel filed a complaint against him, which included allegations overlapping with those of the lawsuit. A hearing in the disciplinary case, before a three-member panel, is scheduled for Sept. 11-12.
Email at jphillips@logandaily.com
Most Popular
Comments / 0