Boland’s Opponent Files Libel Suit Over Campaign Mailer Assertions

State Senate candidate Robert Oltman sued primary foe Assemblywoman Paula Boland (R-Granada Hills) for libel Tuesday, based on a campaign mailer that, he says, falsely reports his opposition to two ballot propositions that expand the use of the death penalty.

The lawsuit, filed in Burbank Superior Court, also names Boland consultants Carlos Rodriguez and Dave Gilliard as defendants.

Boland was unavailable for comment. However, her spokesman, Scott Wilk, said the action is a “completely frivolous suit filed by a man who has no momentum and no message.”

The libel allegation was sparked by a Boland flier received by voters last weekend, the latest salvo in a bitter contest between the two Republicans.

Boland now represents the 38th Assembly District, which includes Simi Valley, Fillmore and parts of the Conejo, Santa Clarita and San Fernando valleys. Forced to leave the seat because of voter-imposed term limits, Boland decided to run for an open state Senate seat.

Boland and Oltman are competing with Wilbert Smith and Sharon Beauchamp for the Republican nomination in the 21st state Senate District, now held by retiring state Sen. Newt Russell’s (R-Pasadena).

The Boland mailer purported to contrast her law enforcement record with that of Oltman. In doing so, Oltman is listed as opposing Propositions 195 and 196, both on the March 26 primary ballot. If enacted, these measures would make murders committed during carjackings and drive-by shootings by gang members capital offenses.

Boland, by contrast, is listed in her campaign literature as favoring the measures.

The source of Boland’s information on her opponent, the mailer said, is a March 28, 1992, campaign election article printed in The Times Valley Edition.

In that article, Oltman, then running for the state Assembly against Assemblyman Bill Hoge (R-Pasadena), was asked, “Do you support capital punishment for any crimes? If so, which ones.”

Oltman responded: “Yes. Crimes covered by current law.”

At the time, there were no proposals aimed at extending the death penalty to carjacking and drive-by-shooting killings. Therefore, Oltman said, he could not have opposed what did not exist. Further, Oltman said he has endorsed both propositions.

“Obviously, she thinks I’m a soothsayer and I can predict these things,” said an angry Oltman.

But Gilliard, a Sacramento GOP consultant, said the mailer was a fair interpretation of Oltman’s 1992 statement.

“The way we interpret it, he did not want to expand it [the death penalty],” Gilliard said. The libel suit is “just a way to get publicity in the last week before the primary,” he said.

In the complaint, attorney Allan L. Dollison charges that the Boland campaign intentionally distorted the 1992 statement of support for the death penalty to dissuade voters from choosing Oltman over Boland.

“This is libelous on its face,” the complaint said. “It clearly exposes [Oltman] to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy, because it makes plaintiff look like he is opposed to two very popular initiatives, when in fact he has supported and endorsed these initiatives.”

The lawsuit seeks to recoup the cost of a rebuttal mailer as well as unspecified punitive damages.