Lawsuit Alert 2
Madec v. Goldsmith and Olivas
If you’re reading this in your email inbox, please note that the article may be too long to appear in full. Click the button below to view the complete piece online.
The PDFs and images are marked with [PDF below] and [image below] so listeners on the Substack app know when to check their screen.
Please mark your calendar and plan to attend these two important meetings:
SCCCD Board of Trustees (BOT) meeting today, November 4, at 3:30 p.m. in the District Office.
State Center Federation of Teachers (SCFT) Mega General Membership Meeting on Thursday, November 13, at 5:30 p.m. in the Fresno City College (FCC) Cafeteria. This in-person meeting is exclusively for SCFT members and requires an RSVP. At the meeting, SCFT leadership will present districtwide survey results on the BOT and district leadership, followed by group deliberation and next steps.
In this second installment of our Lawsuit Alert series, we dive into a pivotal new chapter in the mounting legal fallout surrounding Chancellor Carole Goldsmith’s tenure at the State Center Community College District (SCCCD). Unlike previous cases that targeted the District itself, Madec v. Goldsmith and Olivas breaks new ground by holding both Goldsmith and Officer Kallee Olivas, who conducted the investigation, personally accountable for what can only be described as a brazen abuse of institutional power and one of the most insidious examples of administrative corruption we have covered. Filed on October 10, 2025, this lawsuit exposes how Goldsmith allegedly weaponized the justice system and campus law enforcement to intentionally and irreparably damage Madec’s reputation, dismantle his career, and most egregiously, strip him of his liberty.
When a public official like Goldsmith wields law enforcement, such as the SCCCD Police Department, as an instrument of personal vendetta, it endangers not only the individual victim but also strikes at the very heart of institutional integrity and the public’s trust in governance. While Goldsmith has made no secret of her disdain for President Trump, her leadership style eerily mirrors the very brand of autocratic, vindictive governance that she so vehemently criticizes in public. Her actions epitomize hypocrisy. Goldsmith’s legacy is undeniably marred by retribution, corruption, and deception. Yet the ultimate shield and enabler behind this toxic pattern is none other than the SCCCD Board of Trustees. Their preference for governance through retaliation and cover-ups rather than integrity, perpetuates Goldsmith’s destructive leadership. And despite overwhelming evidence, the Board has chosen willful complicity, allowing Goldsmith’s corrosive influence to fester unchecked across the District.
If the name Edward Madec rings a bell, it’s no coincidence. Our prior in-depth coverage meticulously chronicled the deeply flawed criminal prosecution engineered by Goldsmith—a prosecution so poorly constructed and brazenly tampered with that Judge Brian Alvarez dismissed it outright for failing to meet even the minimal standard of probable cause, famously declaring it did not “pass the smell test.”
In this article, we will briefly revisit key elements of our previous reporting to refresh readers’ memory; detail Goldsmith’s relentless but ultimately unsuccessful taxpayer-funded campaign following the dismissal of all criminal charges to secure a restraining order against Madec; unpack the newly filed civil lawsuit against Goldsmith and Olivas for violating Madec’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights; offer our predictions about upcoming legal maneuvers expected from Chancellor Goldsmith that are sure to further saddle taxpayers with legal costs; and, as always, close with our hallmark section, “A Word for Supporters.”
1. A Brief Review
In our previous article, “Destroying Lives Funded by the Taxpayers: Chapter 1,” we revealed how Officer Kallee Olivas, under cross-examination by Madec’s defense attorney Robert Carroll, admitted that the alleged threat attributed to Madec was “cobbled together” through a “sloppy investigation.”
Even more troubling, Olivas admitted to deliberately omitting exculpatory evidence from her police report. Of the 30-plus students in that classroom, Olivas interviewed only 12, claiming the rest were unreachable. Yet, her report included statements from just four students who accused Madec while excluding the others whose accounts contained exculpatory evidence, claiming they were irrelevant or unimportant. Most of these omitted witnesses reported no indication of threats or alarming behavior. The most glaring omission was the testimony of a retired probation officer who explicitly stated she heard no threats—a critical exclusion given her extensive career as a sworn law enforcement officer and expertise in threat identification. This raises a critical question: Is Officer Olivas simply incompetent, or is she really good at following orders? [image below]
The criminal case’s integrity suffered further severe blows due to conflicts of interest. Senior Deputy District Attorney Douglas Haas filed the criminal complaint while serving as a part-time faculty member at FCC, making him an employee of Chancellor Goldsmith, the alleged victim. Disturbingly, Haas reportedly did not even review all the evidence before filing charges.
Yet another irregularity surfaced when following Madec’s initial arrest in Los Banos and his subsequent release on bail, he was suddenly re-arrested, driven to Fresno, and booked into Fresno County jail by SCCCD police officer Michael Allison. Sources reveal Allison confronted the Los Banos City jail dispatcher, who disputed the re-arrest, with the chilling command:
“Stay out of it. This is our jurisdiction and I’m taking orders from above.”
Sergeant Allison recently completed the Sherman Block Supervisory Leadership Institute, a program designed to develop leadership, ethical decision-making, and critical thinking in California law enforcement supervisors—much-needed training for an officer who allegedly re-arrests a bailed-out citizen based on “orders from above.” [image below]
Notably, Sergeant Allison appears to have been generously rewarded for such obedience and seems poised for further advancement within the leadership ranks of the SCCCD Police Department. [images below]
Compounding these issues, during the preliminary hearing for the criminal case, multiple witnesses disclosed that Ms. Yessenia Carrillo, a civil attorney employed by the law firm Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW) representing SCCCD and reportedly Fresno City Council member Miguel Arias’s niece, improperly contacted them to discuss their testimony shortly before the hearing—a practice that Madec’s attorney labeled “tampering with criminal witnesses.” The presiding judge expressed profound astonishment, describing such conduct as “highly unusual.” He further linked the interference to the fragile evidentiary foundation underpinning the prosecution, stating:
“This is one of those instances and cases where there is a paucity in evidence as far as the elements of each of the offenses charged. I think against that observation is the fact, and the Court can’t overlook it, that there was evidence that a law firm in a civil matter that may be related to this case may be outreaching and contacting witnesses in this case. That kind of paints this whole case in a way and gives it background in a way that brings context to why maybe we’re here today.”
Judge Brian Alvarez ultimately dismissed the case with strong rebuke:
“This, in a lot of ways, doesn’t pass the smell-test, frankly. There’s something going on here that is above and beyond your normal garden-variety criminal case…I cannot hold him to answer. This is one of those cases where the preliminary examination is -- the purpose of it was to weed out meritless cases. And this is one of those cases where it just didn’t rise to the occasion of probable cause. And so, frankly, for that reason, he is discharged.”
Still, this embarrassing dismissal of the criminal case did not halt Goldsmith’s relentless, vindictive, and taxpayer-funded campaign against Madec.
2. The Restraining Order
Judge Alvarez’s dismissal of the criminal case did not put an end to Goldsmith’s relentless vendetta, nor did it dampen her willingness to burn through taxpayer resources to pursue Madec. Instead, she shifted tactics and set her sights on a civil restraining order against Madec. Unlike criminal protective orders, restraining orders are civil cases initiated by one party against another; typically, after a petition is filed, a judge grants a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) if the very low legal threshold is met, and sets a later hearing to determine whether a permanent restraining order is warranted.
On November 1, 2023, Goldsmith used taxpayer funds to seek a restraining order against Madec by retaining the District’s favored law firm, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW). She supported her request with her own declaration, plus declarations from Officer Olivas and Glynna Billings—a District Accounting Manager who briefly served as interim Vice President of Administrative Services at FCC long after Madec had already been placed on leave. The judge granted the TRO, but with the criminal case still pending, the full hearing was repeatedly delayed because any statement made by Madec in the civil matter could have jeopardized his position in the ongoing criminal case. Ultimately, at the first restraining order hearing after the criminal case fell apart, the judge dissolved the TRO, recognizing that the evidence simply didn’t hold up. Nevertheless, Goldsmith continued pushing for another hearing.
On October 6, 2025, Goldsmith and Billings appeared in court for a final hearing on the restraining order. Dr. Gerri Santos documented the spectacle on social media, highlighting Goldsmith’s attempts to influence the judge through dramatic testimony and “calculated crocodile tears.” [image below]
Despite Judge Culver Kapetan’s candor about her social ties with SCCCD attorney Kirsten Corey and tennis partner Glynna Billings, Goldsmith’s spectacle and theatrics weren’t enough to merit a restraining order. The court dismissed the case, as reflected in the minute order, citing insufficient clear and convincing evidence. [image below]
Even more bizarrely, by all accounts and sworn testimony, Madec has never met, interacted with, or communicated with Billings. Billings herself admitted she had no direct contact with Madec, claiming to fear him only because of rumors and Goldsmith’s narrative. With no substantive testimony supporting Goldsmith’s claims, and with her closest allies dwindling, she resorted to parading a witness who was, effectively, just parroting hearsay.
This costly, drawn-out campaign against Madec, a project now entering its seventh year, underscores the scale of wasted taxpayer dollars and the erosion of institutional integrity to satisfy Goldsmith’s vendetta. Now the tables are turning: Goldsmith and Olivas stand as defendants in a federal civil rights lawsuit, facing the consequences of their actions as Madec moves to hold them personally accountable.
3. Madec v. Goldsmith and Olivas
We were first alerted to this case through Mr. Pablo Lopez’s article titled, “The Chancellor, the police, and the coach’s arrest,” published on Fresno Spotlight.
The civil rights lawsuit Madec v. Goldsmith and Olivas, filed on October 10, 2025, in Fresno County Superior Court, marks a decisive escalation in Madec’s battle for justice. Unlike previous lawsuits against the District, this one specifically targets Goldsmith and Olivas in their individual capacities, alleging a pattern of personal retaliation, constitutional violations, and orchestrated abuse under color of law. [PDF below]
The lawsuit claims Goldsmith and Olivas conspired to engineer Madec’s wrongful arrest on October 13, 2023, a fact later confirmed at a preliminary hearing when the court found there was no probable cause. Goldsmith’s vindictive campaign went beyond administrative discipline: she is accused of leveraging her power, law enforcement connections, and District resources to publicly humiliate Madec, maximize emotional harm, and destroy his professional reputation and career. She allegedly used her influence to direct SCCCD police, including Olivas, and the part-time District Attorney Haas, also employed by SCCCD, to file and pursue baseless charges.
Repeated acts of retaliation are detailed throughout the lawsuit. For example, after returning to work following his unlawful first termination, Madec alleges he was subjected to punitive scheduling, denied basic workplace support, and systematically excluded from District resources. The suit further alleges Goldsmith rallied administrators, staff, and law enforcement to “dig up dirt,” seeking a pretext to discipline Madec, culminating in charges alleging threats against a public official without merit.
The lawsuit alleges Officer Olivas committed Brady violations by interviewing multiple exculpatory witnesses but failing to mention them in her police report. The critical exculpatory evidence only surfaced under cross-examination, showcasing both the poor quality and intentional bias of the investigation.
The lawsuit alleges profound multifaceted harm to Madec: he was arrested not once but twice on the same day and subjected to degrading treatment at Goldsmith’s direction; SCCCD Police Department posted warnings about Madec on campus, labeling him as “serious and ongoing threat,” despite the absence of evidence; he was placed on administrative leave, ultimately fired again, and rendered unemployable in his profession; and the stigma and false narrative surrounding the criminal charges and Goldsmith’s targeted public shaming resulted in extreme mental anguish, financial damages through legal bills and loss of opportunities, and irreparable damage to his reputation.
The lawsuit brings forth two central causes of action:
Violation of the Fourth Amendment: Madec alleges he was arrested without probable cause, with Goldsmith and Olivas acting under color of law to send him to jail, a sequence directly aimed at inflicting reputational and emotional injury, making him “radioactive” to other prospective employers.
Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment: Goldsmith and Olivas are accused of depriving Madec of liberty, due process, and equal protection. The lawsuit contends Goldsmith painted Madec as a stereotypical violent male, targeting him in part because of gender, and has a history of favoring female insiders over men in hiring and firing decisions.
Madec is seeking compensatory and punitive damages for lost earnings, emotional suffering, loss of future employment, damage to his reputation, and attorneys’ fees.
This lawsuit signals a turning point: after years of suffering retaliation and institutional abuse Madec is taking a stand. Goldsmith and Olivas will now face personal legal consequences, potentially setting a precedent for accountability and transparency.
We do, however, have a prediction about what Goldsmith will likely do.
4. Prediction
Although this lawsuit names only Goldsmith and Olivas in their personal capacities, not as part of SCCCD, we covered it because, given Goldsmith’s well-documented history, it’s almost certain that taxpayers and the District will ultimately bear the financial burden. Goldsmith has a documented history of treating District resources as her own personal war chest: using District funds to install and maintain security systems on her private property, bankroll extravagant self-aggrandizing events like the notorious “Carole-Con,” and channeling lucrative no-bid contracts to friends and family without proper oversight or disclosure.
There is every reason to believe she will once again rely on the District’s deep coffers to finance her legal defense, hiring expensive attorneys at public expense even when sued personally. Historically, the seven SCCCD Trustees, who have consistently enabled her vindictive and reckless leadership, have rubber-stamped these expenditures with scant regard for their fiduciary duties or the devastating financial toll on students, faculty, and classified professionals.
Under Goldsmith’s watch, the District’s legal costs have already tripled to more than $2.5 million annually. Funds that could otherwise transform classrooms, restore vital services, fill critical classified positions, and directly benefit the students who rely on the District.
Unless the Board finally asserts its independence, Goldsmith’s latest legal battle will become yet another burden for Valley taxpayers, prolonging accountability and draining precious resources in the service of one malicious leader’s personal vendettas and ego. Only time will tell if the taxpayers end up paying for this lawsuit too.
5. A Word for Supporters
The lack of meaningful action from CSEA and the Academic Senates at Fresno City College, Reedley College, and Clovis Community College signals a deafening silence that speaks volumes. What will it take for these organizations to finally step up? Your members could be the next Madec, and your programs could be the next AgTEC at Madera Community College. How many more colleagues must be retaliated against, lose their jobs, or leave the district before you act? Are you as complacent as the Board of Trustees, or do you genuinely believe that Chancellor Goldsmith is the right leader for our district? Are you truly listening to your members’ concerns?
Faculty and classified professionals, the ball is in your court.
State Center Community College District (SCCCD) - Fresno City College (FCC) - Madera Community College (MCC) - Clovis Community College (CCC) - Reedley College (RC) - Dr. Carole Goldsmith - Chancellor Goldsmith - godmother Goldsmith - La Nina Goldsmith - Magdalena Gomez - Danielle Parra - Robert Fuentes - Austin Ewell - Deborah Ikeda - Nasreen Johnson - Destiny Rodriguez - Noel Reyes