The $5.35 million federal civil rights lawsuit filed against Augusta County Sheriff Donald Smith that is making news today might need to be taken with a grain of salt.
The reason I’m starting there: the allegations in the suit, Reynolds v. Smith, filed in the Harrisonburg Division of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, filed on behalf of a former sheriff’s deputy, Dennis Reynolds, were first peddled to me in 2023 by people who I know to be sworn political enemies of Smith, whose original sin was running for sheriff in 2015 against the handpicked candidate of the local political machine, and then winning.
Reynolds v. Smith
There are folks who have wanted his head on a platter for 10 years, and these folks have been hyping the smallest of things to try to get their pound of flesh.
That said, there may indeed be merit to this suit, which alleges “a disturbing pattern of constitutional and statutory violations including disability discrimination, retaliation, defamation, and sexual harassment.”
Don’t worry, we’re going to get into the weeds with what is alleged.
There’s a ton to unpack.
***
Before I get into the details, though, I need to point out that I reached out to Smith for comment on the allegations at the center of this suit, and predictably, not just because it’s Smith, who has, over the years, shown himself to not be interested in the slightest in transparency, but because of the standard-issue approach that they teach you in politician school on commenting on lawsuits, I didn’t even get a response back.
So, the reporting that you’ll see here is necessarily one-sided, because we have nothing from the defendant, and a detailed 109-page filing from the plaintiff, Reynolds, and his attorney, Elliott Harding.
And, one more detour on the way to the meat of the story: some background on Elliott Harding, the attorney.
Harding is based in Charlottesville, and is a UVA and Washington & Lee School of Law alum who worked on the staff of one-term Republican Fifth District Congressman Tom Garrett.
He also ran as an independent against Democratic State Sen. Creigh Deeds in the 2019 election cycle, and in a moment of weakness, got caught on a doorbell camera taking Deeds campaign materials from homes in Albemarle County toward the end of that campaign.
We all have our issues, and seek mercy for our transgressions, right?
I can hear some of you typing already – why are you bringing up what the lawyer did in 2019?
It’s part of the job.
***
In the matter of the lawsuit filed against Donald Smith, we have a press release from Harding that went out today alleging the already mentioned “disturbing pattern of constitutional and statutory violations including disability discrimination, retaliation, defamation, and sexual harassment.”
The most explosive of the allegations, obviously, is the one involving alleged sexual harassment.
This is the one that was peddled to me back in 2023, when the name Dennis Reynolds first appeared on our pages in AFP, related to a generated controversy over a carport that had been installed at taxpayer expense at Reynolds’s home.
ICYMI
The matter with the carport: Reynolds was a K9 officer in the Augusta County Sheriff’s Office, and in 2018, Smith authorized the construction of the carport at his personal residence to facilitate the handling of his trained police dog, Rico.
The issue with the carport came to a head in the summer of 2023 when Reynolds resigned from the sheriff’s office, and Smith sent him an invoice for $3,245 for the cost of the carport.
The carport matter got resolved with the Virginia Police K9 Association paying for the carport.
As I was reporting on that story, it was related to me that Reynolds had resigned under the threat of termination, an allegation that has made its way into his federal lawsuit.
I’m getting out ahead of myself telling you that now, though.
***
The termination issue came at the end of a saga involving Reynolds dating to a 2021 one-car traffic accident involving Reynolds’s brother, Robert.
The lawsuit concedes that Dennis Reynolds contacted the Augusta County Emergency Communications Center to ask the ECC not to call Virginia State Police to report the accident, which led to an internal sheriff’s office investigation into whether or not the call constituted obstruction of justice and, ultimately, an investigation by State Police.
The VSP investigation did not lead to charges against Dennis Reynolds, but in the course of the investigation, he alleges, according to his suit, that Smith instructed him “to delete evidence that might be subject to the investigation and potential search warrant,” which, according to the suit, “included numerous inappropriate and salacious text messages that Defendant Smith had sent to Plaintiff, suggesting an additional motive for Defendant Smith to want these communications destroyed,” the suit alleges.
This is where things get “disturbing,” per the framing of the suit in the press release.
***
“The evidence includes a total of 1,102 text messages across 107 conversations between Plaintiff and Defendant Smith during this period. The volume and content of these messages demonstrates the unusual nature of this supervisor subordinate relationship,” the suit alleges.
Unusual, to say the least.
“Defendant sent numerous unprofessional and sexually suggestive messages to Plaintiff. These included comments about the size of Plaintiff’s genitalia, statements that he would ‘come cuddle’ Plaintiff, and offers for Plaintiff to stay at Defendant’s house in Churchville. Defendant repeatedly told Plaintiff he loved him and wanted him ‘close,’” the suit alleges.
Factor in a scary health issue for Reynolds, who was treated for what turned out to be a non-cancerous tumor on his T7 vertebrae, and the mental-health stress of dealing with both the tumor and the odd fixation he claimed Smith had for him romantically, we had ourselves a situation.
“Plaintiff requested additional time off in early May 2023 to address his physical and mental health needs, but was denied due to alleged staffing needs,” the suit alleges, and Reynolds was later suspended from his job after refusing to sign disciplinary letters related to him taking mental-health days, and handed a decertification letter rehashing the allegations related to the 2021 incident for which he had been cleared.
Reynolds’s resignation, in July 2023, came under duress, according to the suit, “as he was faced with the choice of resigning or being formally terminated for alleged policy violations that were directly related to his use of sick leave for mental health purposes.”
On top of all of this, the suit alleges that Smith “submitted a Notification of Eligibility for Decertification to the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, seeking to have Plaintiff decertified as a law enforcement officer, citing “the same alleged policy violations related to sick leave mentioned in the June 4, 2023 meeting” and “the prior Virginia State Police investigation for which Plaintiff was never charged with any wrongdoing.”
The VDCJS Board unanimously sided with Reynolds six months later, but, according to the suit, Smith has worked since to prevent Reynolds from getting other jobs in law enforcement, by sending letters to potential employers, naming, specifically, as one potential employer, the Nelson County Sheriff’s Office, that “contained the same discredited allegations that the Board had rejected.”
“The decertification attempt has severely damaged Plaintiff’s professional reputation in the law enforcement community, making it difficult for him to secure comparable employment,” the suit alleges.
***
The suit seeks $5 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 from Smith in punitive damages, “based on his willful, wanton, and malicious violation of Plaintiff’s clearly established rights,” according to the suit.
The thinking there, per a quote from Harding, in the press release:
“Law enforcement officers must be held to the highest standard—not just in the field, but as employers. Sheriff Smith weaponized his authority to retaliate against a vulnerable employee and subjected him to severe emotional, professional and reputational harm.”
Share
Chris Graham
