With accusations and restraining orders, Jimmy Dutra lawsuit spills into Watsonville City Council chambers

A sexual assault lawsuit that has dogged Watsonville City Councilmember Jimmy Dutra for more than two years continues to play out in the courtroom and council chambers, months after Dutra won reelection and a jury awarded more than $1 million in damages to his accuser.

In an almost empty Watsonville courtroom on March 25, Dutra, with his mother, Terrie, and a family friend, asked a judge to issue a permanent restraining order against Kelli Siefke.

Siefke’s son, Stephen Siefke, sued Dutra in October 2022, alleging that the councilmember sexually abused him in 2005 when Siefke was 12. Last September, a Santa Cruz jury found Dutra liable in the case and awarded Stephen Siefke more than $1.1 million. Nearly two months later, Dutra won his third term on the Watsonville City Council. 

In the months that have followed the trial and the election, the case has not gone away. Dutra, who has never been charged criminally in relation to the lawsuit, has not yet paid the court judgement; he filed an appeal of the decision in December. He told Lookout that he’s still searching for legal representation and is representing himself for now.

Kelli Siefke, meanwhile, has continued to show up at Watsonville City Council meetings, using the public comment period to accuse Dutra of child abuse, demand his resignation and press city officials for information about the remuneration Dutra receives from the city for his role as a councilmember.

The dispute returned to the courtroom earlier this month, when Dutra first filed a temporary retraining order against Kelli Siefke on March 5.

Last week, both Dutra and Siefke were in court once again over the restraining order. Tensions ran high on both sides of the aisle as Dutra accused Siefke of repeatedly verbally attacking him and spreading “lies and accusations” toward him and his mother.

“If she’s going to be continuing this, I will be very clear with the public on what is happening,” Dutra told Judge Jerry Bustos Vinluan. 

The judge extended the temporary restraining order for another six months. A court hearing to determine whether the restraining order will be dropped or made permanent is scheduled for Sept. 16. 

Under the terms of the restraining order, Siefke is still allowed to attend city council meetings as long as she maintains her distance from Dutra. She argues she’s doing nothing wrong by speaking out at city council meetings. “It sounds so dramatic,” Siefke told Lookout of Dutra’s restraining order. “And you know, I haven’t done anything to him,”

Hours after last Tuesday’s court hearing, both Dutra and Siefke attended a Watsonville City Council meeting, where Dutra did not make any statement about the restraining order and Siefke did not speak during the public comment period.

Siefke first began making comments about Dutra and the lawsuit in front of the city council on Feb. 25. While not naming Dutra explicitly, Siefke questioned why the city would “allow someone on city council who was found guilty in a civil trial for child molestation.”

The discussion quickly escalated into a back-and-forth between Siefke and Dutra, who accused Siefke’s son, Stephen, and fellow councilmember Casey Clark — who testified in the civil trial — of conspiring together. The heated exchange was shut down by Watsonville Mayor Maria Orozco, who tried to deescalate the situation by telling Dutra he could not continue to address Siefke because the dispute was not on the meeting agenda, nor related to any city business. 

“I have two minutes, I can say whatever I want,” Dutra responded. “You cannot get up here and spread lies,” he said to Kelli Siefke, before turning to a discussion about the city’s SeeClickFix public works mobile app. 

Siefke came back again to speak at the Watsonville City Council’s meeting on March 11. Dutra, who left the council chambers while Siefke spoke during the public comment period, returned to announce that he had filed a restraining order against her. 

Dutra said Siefke’s remarks at city council meetings amount to defamation and are targeting his reputation, putting him at risk of being physically harmed. “I was never found guilty of child molestation, and she repeated it twice,” he told Vinluan. 

Everyone has a right to free speech, Dutra told Lookout, but it becomes a problem when someone speaks to the council and is not being truthful. If Siefke continues to speak at city council meetings, Dutra said he’ll most likely file a defamation lawsuit. “I’m a public official, the rules are different for me,” he said. “I’m a bigger punching bag than just a regular person.” 

Siefke told Lookout she believes Dutra’s restraining order stems, in part, from a brief encounter she had with the councilmember’s mother outside of a grocery store in Watsonville in early March. Siefke said she made a comment to her husband, Louie, as they passed Terrie Dutra while walking to their truck.

“I go, ‘God, I’m so glad our son isn’t a pedophile,’ and we kept walking. We didn’t miss a beat,” Siefke said. “[We] got all the way to his truck, and [Terrie] screamed something, and Louie screamed back at her, basically, and we got in our truck and left.” 

Terrie Dutra told the judge that Siefke and her husband were “hollering, ‘There’s the mother of the child molester,’” and that she was livid and felt humiliated following the encounter. Terrie Dutra said in court that she experienced high blood pressure and bloodshot eyes following the interaction, and had to drive herself to the local hospital to get treated. 

Days later, Siefke said she was not surprised to see a sheriff’s deputy at her front door serving her the temporary restraining order. She said she even gave the deputy who served the order a “big hug” and thanked him. 

The temporary restraining order read like a Jackie Collins novel because of how dramatic it seemed, Siefke said. The order describes Siefke as being “unhinged and unpredictable,” she said. Siefke said, “you’d think Charles Manson was in this” restraining order, when she believed she was calm and reasonable. “I wasn’t threatening him or doing any of that. I just read my statement, I sat down, and then I left,” Siefke said. 

Siefke told the court that she had pharmacy and dental degrees, and asked Judge Vinulan to not make the temporary restraining order permanent. A permanent restraining order could leave a stain on her record if she wishes to return to work as a pharmacy technician. Siefke’s pharmacy tech license was canceled in 2007, according to a search of California’s state licence database. 

Despite the extended restraining order, the dispute continues to play out publicly. Two weeks ago, Siefke was back in the city council chambers once again, calling for Dutra to resign from his seat on the council or asking the governing body to censure him. 

“The presence of councilman Dutra in office, considering these findings, is a stain on this council and the trust of our citizens,” Siefke said at the meeting. “It tarnishes the image of the city, and more importantly, it undermines the value that this community holds dear. We as a city deserve better.” 

Dutra stepped out of the city council chambers at the beginning of the public comment period, returning only once Siefke left the meeting. 

Siefke told Lookout she’ll continue to attend city council meetings to push for Dutra to resign from his seat. 

Dutra, for his part, said he has no intention of entertaining those demands. “I’m not resigning. This is how democracy works,” Dutra said. “I had an opponent. Someone ran against me, but people had a choice. They chose me.” 

__
FOR THE RECORD: This story was updated to clarify that Kelly Siefke told a court she has pharmacy and dental degrees and to add that her pharmacy technician license was canceled.

__

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.