Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

‘I Do Not Support Her’: California Sheriff Speaks Out After His Image is Featured in Harris Campaign Ad

Vice President Kamala Harris released a new ad on Friday that highlights what she would do if elected president. A California sheriff was less than thrilled to see himself in the ad as she promoted her stance on border security.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux wanted to set the record straight about his opinion of Harris.

“In light of a recent political ad put out by Kamala Harris featuring Sheriff Boudreaux, as well as other local law enforcement, the Sheriff wants to make it abundantly clear that his image is being used without his permission, and he does NOT endorse Harris for President or any other political office,” he said.

Boudreaux has been in the Tulare County Sheriff’s Office for 37 years and is the president of the California State Sheriff’s Association.

He described Harris’ visit to Central Valley in 2013, which is where the video clip from the campaign ad originated. He could not recall why she was there but did remember her demeanor. At the time, Harris was the California attorney general.

“As a matter of fact, I would like to point out the misleading information projected in that same political ad. In the ad, Harris claims to have spent decades fighting violent crime as a ‘border state prosecutor.’ The facts are that ‘then California Attorney General Kamala’ came to the Valley in 2014 touting a years-long investigation into a multi-national drug operation, with ties to Mexican drug cartels and prison gangs,” said Boudreaux.

In the case he was referring to, 11 people were arrested. One of them turned out to be suspected “kingpin” Jose Magana of Dinuba.

Boudreaux also stated that Harris “never cared about the cartels,” insisting that she “did nothing” to prevent people from crossing the border illegally.

To throw her under the bus even further, the sheriff said that Harris’ appearance at the border was just “smoke and mirrors,” pointing out that she was in and out which did not sit well with Boudreaux.

“We were in the green room. She never came in and said hello to any of us. She walked up front, gave her presser, literally walked out, never said hi to any of us,” he said. “I’m disgusted because, you know, she didn’t shake hands. She didn’t say hello. And she’s taken credit for all this work that the locals did.”

Boudreaux was not alone in his criticism. Tulare County District Attorney Tim Ward shared the same reaction to the video, which he was also featured in.

“The hypocrisy knows no bounds,” he told the outlet. “It’s disingenuous and her campaign ad, somehow now, touting her reputation as a prosecutor as a positive thing, she was attorney general under three of the worst tragedies that had befallen the citizens of the state of California.”

Golden State Justice, Boudreaux’s political action committee, issued a statement as well slamming Harris’ ad. The committee said that Harris worked against California law enforcement’s efforts to keep “criminals” from crossing the border, bringing guns and drugs with them.

“She repeatedly defunded and shuttered task forces designed to protect our residents, leaving the Valley and our state vulnerable,” the statement read. “Kamala’s sad attempt to paint herself as tough on the border by implying my support – and the support of neighboring law enforcement leaders – is pathetic.”
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
beckyromero · 36-40, F
Oh, get over it.

Do you think everybody in every photo op voted for the politicians in such photos?
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@beckyromero Whatever it takes to win, right?
pdockal · 56-60, M
@beckyromero

So your fine with you likeness associated with TRUMP ?
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@pdockal bazinga
pdockal · 56-60, M
@sunsporter1649

People say get over it till it happens directly to them then they usually change their tune
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@pdockal
So your fine with you likeness associated with TRUMP ?

I've been to Comiskey. Doesn't mean I was rooting for the Dirty Hose those times when I was there. But I didn't whine and cry because my face was shown in a crowd shot on TV. Because I know that people who watched the game on TV were smart enough to know that not everyone there was a Dirty Hose fan.
pdockal · 56-60, M
@beckyromero

That scenario has nothing to do with this because you were a fan and not linked to the cubs

He was linked to her campaign

I'll ask again
How would you react if you were linked to liking Trump & his policies ?????
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@pdockal

It has EVERYTHING to do with it.

The Dirty Hose were well within their right to use that video, had they chose to, in advertisements to their benefit.
pdockal · 56-60, M
@beckyromero

Your lost
Your confused

Politicians can't even use music without permission

A baseball game isn't politics

Are you going to answer my question ?????
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@pdockal

Of COURSE there is politics in baseball.

There's a LOT of politics in baseball.

A copyrighted piece of music is not the same as freely attending an event.
pdockal · 56-60, M
@beckyromero

WRONG

In general, people have the right to control how their likeness is used for commercial purposes without their permission, and using it without their consent can violate their rights. This is known as the right of publicity.

Then I'll assume your ok with becoming Trumps poster child for his campaign ?
Especially since your refusing to answer that question
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@pdockal

The right of publicity are generally governed by state laws.

No one's rights were being violated.

A political commercial is not the same as an ad being made for a commercial purpose.

Why don't you ask Donald Trump if he got a signed consent form for every person at his rallies.

Re: The Kamala Harris campaign ad, see the following California statute:

----------

California's right of publicity statute, Civil Code Section 3344, was first enacted in 1971 and provides as follows.

California Civil Code Section 3344:

'3344. Use of Another's Name, Voice, Signature, Photograph, or Likeness in Advertising or Soliciting Without Prior Consent.

(a) Any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing such profits, the injured party or parties are required to prove his or her deductible expenses. Punitive damages may also be awarded to the injured party or parties. The prevailing party in any action under this section shall also be entitled to attorney's fees and costs.

(b) As used in this section, "photograph" means any photograph or photographic reproduction, still or moving, or any videotape or live television transmission, of any person, such that the person is readily identifiable.

A person shall be deemed to be readily identifiable from a photograph when one who views the photograph with the naked eye can reasonably determine that the person depicted in the photograph is the same person who is complaining of its unauthorized use.
If the photograph includes more than one person so identifiable, then the person or persons complaining of the use shall be represented as individuals, rather than solely as members of a definable group represented in the photograph. A definable group includes, but is not limited to, the following examples: a crowd at any sporting event, a crowd in any street or public building, the audience at any theatrical or stage production, a glee club, or a baseball team.
A person or persons shall be considered to be represented as members of a definable group if they are represented in the photograph solely as a result of being present at the time the photograph was taken and have not been singled out as individuals in any manner.

(c) Where a photograph or likeness of an employee of the person using the photograph or likeness appearing in the advertisement or other publication prepared by or in behalf of the user is only incidental, and not essential, to the purpose of the publication in which it appears, there shall arise a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence that the failure to obtain the consent of the employee was not a knowing use of the employee's photograph or likeness.

(d) For purposes of this section, a use of a name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness in connection with any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign, shall not constitute a use for which consent is required under subdivision (a).

(e) The use of a name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness in a commercial medium shall not constitute a use for which consent is required under subdivision (a) solely because the material containing such use is commercially sponsored or contains paid advertising. Rather it shall be a question of fact whether or not the use of the person's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness was so directly connected with the commercial sponsorship or with the paid advertising as to create a use for which consent is required under subdivision (a).

(f) Nothing in this section shall apply to the owners or employees of any medium used for advertising, including, but not limited to, newspapers, magazines, radio and television networks and stations, cable television systems, billboards, and transit ads, by whom any advertisement or solicitation in violation of this section is published or disseminated, unless it is established that such owners or employees had knowledge of the unauthorized use of the person's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness as prohibited by this section.

(g) The remedies provided for in this section are cumulative and shall be in addition to any others provided for by law.

(Legislative History: 1971 chapter 1595, 1984 chapter 1704).