By Frank Parlato
DELTA Rescue high on a sunburnt hill in Acton, California, there’s a place where animals go not to die but to live. It was Leo Grillo’s idea. D.E.L.T.A. Rescue—Dedication and Everlasting Love to Animals.
He founded DELTA in 1979 as a response to a world that disposed of animals like waste. His principle was simple: once rescued, an animal must never be harmed again.
Dogs in straw bale homes. Cats in air-conditioned cottages. Horses on pasture. A hospital. A wing for fragile dogs. No adoptions. No gas chambers. “No kill” means no kill.
He said they were angels—soft ones with fur, sent to test our decency.
The workers? Mexican, hard workers, keeping the operation running for 45 years, with Leo at the helm. Dependent on donations. Some people put DELTA in their wills.
High on a ridge in Acton, California, on 115 acres, 1,500 animals live out their lives not in fear but in peace.
Duarte Started With Bleach. Then Moved on to Dog Food
She came from Mexico, near Jalisco, crossing the border illegally to have a baby in America in 2002. Her name is Adriana Duarte Valentines.
Her husband Raúl Lopez came. The couple settled in Lancaster, Los Angeles County. By 2007, they had three children and worked off the books.
In June 2017, Adriana Duarte applied at DELTA Rescue. She said she had worked in the lettuce fields in Oxnard to explain her lack of documented work history.
Grillo’s son-in-law, Enrique Estrada, a Mexican who married his daughter Erica and is the father to Grillo’s grandchildren –managed DELTA. Enrique believed Duarte. He told his father-in-law, who said, “Let’s give her a break.”
In Oxnard, the lettuce picker wakes before light and enters a field wet with condensation and pesticides, chilled by early Oxnard fog. They move in rows—always bending, cutting, stacking. Blades are sharp. Hands get raw. By midday, the sun beats down; shivering becomes sweat-drenched. Backs ache. Knees burn. You bend over a hundred times an hour.
Grillo thought she would be a grateful worker –like the honest Mexican American workers he knew and employed. He didn’t know she had never picked a head of lettuce in her life.
Duarte’s Sanctuary Scam
Duarte worked as an independent contractor. Her choice. She submitted her IRS W-9 with a fake Social Security number. She worked for $15/hour, feeding cats and cleaning the catteries –air-conditioned houses Grillo provided for cats- where they could go in and out –as they liked.
She worked hard and about six months after being hired, DELTA trusted her enough to give her a key and let her work alone. This gave her access to the supplies.
Duarte soon realized that stealing from DELTA would not be hard. Because Grillo insisted on premium food, reselling would not be hard either.
It started with bleach, paper towels, gloves. Then she graduated to dog and cat food. She managed her thefts by taking different amounts of products at different times. Continuously increasing.
On weekends she sold her goods at swap meets. A table full of pet goods. Cash only. Half-price. Her customers asked no questions. And got no receipts.
She used the money to pay tuition, buy gifts, and pay bills. She made four times her husband’s off-the-books pay -by stealing from animals. She promised her son a new car.
Secret Affairs of Adriana Duarte
During her two plus years of stealing, Duarte had several affairs. The first was a married coworker. The pregnancy came quick. She kept it hidden from her husband and DELTA.
If Grillo found out, he’d move her from the catteries because of toxoplasmosis, associated with cat feces. It can cause deformity, blindness, deafness, brain damage or death of the unborn. If Grillo moved her away from the cats, she would be separated from the supplies.
She had a miscarriage. Cause unknown. Suspicion: toxoplasmosis.
Her second affair had all the earmarks of business. She drove her truck past the night guard, after DELTA closed at 4:30 pm. The guard was romantically involved with her sister. She needed his silence. She paid for his silence – a secret between them – not known to the sister—paid sometimes in her truck, sometimes outside the range of cameras where only the horses could see.
Her third conquest was Jorge Avalos, the horse caretaker. His trailer stood near the pastures by the front gate.
She told her husband she was working late. She billed DELTA for the extra hours. But her overtime began when the sun slipped beneath the hills. She would slip into Jorge’s trailer. And then, she slipped again and got pregnant. This time, with Avalos. This time she did not have a miscarriage.
The months passed. She concealed her pregnancy from her husband and DELTA.
From Catteries to Maternity
One day Grillo heard she might be pregnant. He asked Maria Urias – who knew Duarte and had worked for DELTA for 15 years. Duarte told Maria she was not pregnant. Duarte lied.
But things came to a head one week later, on Friday, January 31, 2020. Duarte had just finished loading up her truck, when she felt dizzy. She drove to Antelope Valley Medical Center. They moved her to maternity.
She texted her supervisor, Steven Spears: “I have an emergency. I won’t be in tomorrow.”
Spears assigned Rosa Martinez to cover. Rosa found the shelves empty. She told Spears. Something was wrong. The order had just come in.
Spears asked Rosa how much she needed. Rosa calculated. It was less than half of what Duarte had ordered.
When Grillo was told, he suspected Duarte, now missing, had stolen at least one week of supplies.
A Farewell to Duarte
On February 2, Duarte wrote she wanted to return. She confessed to hiding her pregnancy, but not to theft.
Sun, February 02, 2020
“Mr. Leo, excuse me for not doing things right, I am having my baby, I said nothing because I did not want to disturb him and I felt able to continue working, I feel very comfortable working to rescue the delta … I just want to go back and keep working the same way, sir. I don’t want days off…”
Grillo replied:
February 2, 2020,
“Adriana, first, we wish you and your baby well… you cannot work around cats if you are pregnant…
“Let us know when you have the baby and you are able to return to work. If we have an opening we will be happy to have you back.”
Over the next few days Grillo got a better idea of what she had stolen. It was more than a one-week supply.
On February 4, Duarte emailed Grillo. She had the baby, as it turned out, via a C-section.
“sir I’m ready to start working, everything is fine with me my baby is already born and he will be in the care of someone else, I hope the opportunity to continue working for delta rescue.”
Grillo replied.
“Sorry Adriana, but we replaced you already. And there is something not right with your story.
“First you are fine, then you are having an emergency and you are in the hospital ….then they are keeping you in the hospital because you are also pregnant, and then two days later you have had “the baby” and you are ready to come back to work?”
He called her a liar.
“No you cannot work here ever again. Good luck to you.”
On February 5, Duarte shot back.
“…I don’t need good luck because I have it, but you’re surrounded by scorpions, I didn’t trust many of those who They surround you and do not tell your things that everyone knows when you are in snowfall long before I worked with you, ball of ipocrites that you have with you. Excuse me and thanks for everything.”
A Baby, and a Run to Mexico
Adriana Duarte had given birth to a baby girl. Her husband, Raúl Lopez, refused to visit. The child was not given his name. Instead, Lopez confronted Jorge Avalos—the father. Jorge fled the grocery store. Drove off-road. Abandoned his truck. Fled on foot. He ran to Mexico.
Hospital social worker Aquilah James documented Duarte’s tears. The father was uninvolved. The husband offered little support.
What was not documented was that Duarte had no more income from swap meets. No DELTA job with time-padded hours. No Jorge. Maybe no husband. Duarte returned home. Raúl ignored her.
Post-DELTA Hustle
Duarte resumed what she did before DELTA: Hustling. Among her off the books jobs were housecleaning for $100 a day, babysitting for $120 a week, collecting cans for up to $60 a day. At times, she sold tamales or cleaned a car dealership.
Medical records at Antelope Valley – recorded one month after the baby – showed no postpartum depression. No psychological issues noted. She had hope and she had faith in the legal system – as a means of exploitation.
Although she had falsely claimed to be a lettuce picker, she had, before coming to DELTA worked for a time as an independent contractor at Lance Camper Manufacturing Corporation in Lancaster. She claimed she had injured her shoulder and had filed a workers’ compensation claim against Lance.
She was expecting to collect disability, and continue to work off the books.
The Lance Camper claim was denied. She appealed. The appeal was denied. Maybe because her shoulder was not really hurt. But Duarte was resourceful. Based on the same shoulder injury – which she claimed occured at Lance, she made a new claim that she injured her shoulder while working for DELTA. Her claim against DELTA was also denied.
A New Lease on Lies: Duarte’s Lawsuit
Duarte engaged legal counsel, Jacob Nalbandyan who filed a wrongful termination suit on her behalf – based on claims of DELTA not accommodating her pregnancy. Nalbandyan, who was working on contigency, (if he won he got paid) wrote that DELTA’s dismissal of Duarte caused her such psychological damage she might never work again.
In the lawsuit, Duarte claimed it was the cats. She loved them. That’s what broke her. There was no mention of the lies, or billing from a trailer between trysts and tins of Fancy Feast.
Paper Towels to Pedigree: Duarte’s Tally of Theft Exposed
After Adriana Duarte’s departure—DELTA Rescue conducted a forensic audit.
Here is what the forensic auditors said Duarte stole:
Arm & Hammer Litter – $4,440.24
Bird Seed Block – $8,914.20
Bird Seed Bag – $2,347.74
Bleach – $732.60
Cesar Wet Dog Food – $38,242.56
Donut Tray – $1,777.21
En Dry Food Bag – $7,932.24
Fancy Feast Wet Cat Food – $13,840.02
Friskies Wet Cat Food – $54,719.57
Gloves – $6,283.68
Mighty Dog Wet Food – $9,851.91
Om Dry Food Bag – $24,210.90
Om Wet Food Case – $21,697.90
Paper Towels – $820.42
Pedigree Wet Dog Food – $74,070.00
Pee Pads – $5,162.60
Red Flannel Dry Dog Food – $47,666.88
Red Plaid Food Tray – $4,975.14
Ur Dry Cat Food – $6,397.20
Yesterday’s News Cat Litter – $4,388.11
Amount of Loss – $339,071.12
Cops Say Duarte Theft Is a Civil Matter
According to law enforcement officials at the Palmdale Station of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, DELTA’s report of employee theft by Duarte presented evidentiary challenges. Although surveillance footage showed Duarte’s truck filled with items she stole, deputies said they had to witness the theft –catch her in the act – or it was a civil matter.
Grillo’s Deposition: No Filter, No Apology
There were things DELTA learned through discovery that Grillo did not know before: Duarte was an illegal alien; she had used a false Social Security number. The “lettuce picker” job was fabricated. She never filed a tax form. She had affairs onsite with DELTA workers. Now she wanted eight million.
It was two years after she left DELTA. At the deposition, Grillo referred to Duarte as “the bimbo,” echoing his Italian father’s use of the word to refer to adulterous women. He referred to Duarte as a “lettuce picker” a lie she told to get hired, now repurposed to reflect her fraud. He called her a lettuce picker with sarcasm.
The cameras kept rolling.
On why he terminated her: “She was stealing. That’s why I let her go.”
Despite 20 years in America, Duarte could not read, write or speak English.
Grillo said, “This is an immigrant from another country who has no idea what I’m talking about. She’s kind of illiterate. A lettuce picker, by her own admission. But we found out later—she’s not.”
On returning to work immediately after childbirth: “I didn’t even know if she was pregnant,” he said. “We found out in discovery that she had a C-section, she says. Well, nobody comes to work the next day after that. That’s a lie—a bold-faced lie.”
To Duarte’s lawyer: “You’re representing a criminal. An illegal alien…against a nonprofit that saves lives. How do you sleep at night?”
Lawsuit Shifts
Following Grillo’s deposition, Duarte’s counsel Jacob Nalbandyan amended the complaint. Grillo had called her a lettuce picker and a bimbo. Now, Nalbandyan said, it was not just a case of wrongful pregnancy termination, she was fired for being Mexican—and a woman.
Two years later it headed for trial. Judge Kristin Escalante would hear the case. In pretrial hearings, Nalbandyan focused on Grillo’s deposition.
He made selected clips: Editing out context, he had Grillo, bitter and scornful. reduced to a few sound bites.
“Lettuce picker.” “Criminal.” “Immigrant.” “Mexican.” “Illiterate” and “Bimbo.”
The defense said he was angry not biased. He said these things two years after she left. That’s post-lawsuit rage, not cause. Not a motive for her firing.
Judge Escalante disagreed. She ruled the clips admissible, stating they were relevant to Grillo’s “motive and credibility.”
Judge Excludes Illegal Status, Admits ‘Lettuce Picker’
Duarte committed a federal crime, the defense argued, punishable by up to five years in prison: Furnishing a fake Social Security number, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408.
Judge Escalante said. If the jury learned that Duarte used a false Social Security number to obtain employment that could prejudice the jury.
It would also lead to why she did that, which would reveal to the jury that Duarte was an illegal immigrant.
Judge Escalante said it was irrelevant to the core issue of her termination.
Defense counsel Lawya Rangel rebutted. Grillo’s deposition remarks were made after learning Duarte’s status. They could not be explained without reference to her legal status.
“We don’t bring in immigration status,” the judge said.
Nalbandyan pushed further. He wanted to play a clip of Grillo referring to Duarte as a “criminal.”
And another where he said she was an “immigrant.”
Rangel asked, “Does that open the door to her being illegal?”
“That doesn’t touch legal status,” the judge said. “Just geography.”
The jury would be deceived, Escalante ruled in effect, that Duarte was a legally employed American.
Judge Bars Testimony About Duarte’s Affairs
Duarte had claimed lifelong damage from losing her $15-an-hour job. The defense argued her distress, if she had any, may have stemmed from getting pregnant by another man, and losing her lover and her husband.
Judge Escalante barred it. “Too prejudicial.” “Not relevant.”
Judge Bars Nonprofit Status of Employer
Nalbandyan argued the jury shouldn’t hear that DELTA Rescue is a nonprofit relying on donations to save animals. It might make jurors prejudiced against Duarte.
Rangel objected. They rescue animals. It’s not a business. It’s a mission. Grillo doesn’t sell puppies. He doesn’t make a profit. He saves lives on donations.
The judge said, “It’s not relevant under labor codes.”
Escalante ruled: DELTA Rescue could be called an “animal rescue.” But the jury could not know it was a not for profit. No mention of it being a charity. No mention of donations.
Judge Rejects Dishonesty Clause
The defense argued that Duarte lied about her pregnancy in a workplace filled with zoonotic disease risk—and asked for a “dishonesty clause” in the jury instructions.
Judge Escalante disagreed. “You can’t fire someone for not disclosing a pregnancy,” she said, even if there’s a toxoplasmosis risk.
She cited UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc. (1991). The Supreme Court held that pregnant women have the right to make their own employment decisions—even if those decisions involve risks of deformity or death to the unborn child.
Judge Rules Grillo’s Comments Can Be Shown Without Context
Judge Escalante said Nalbandyan could show the jury clips from Grillo’s deposition. Each clip should be different. The clips didn’t have to be in sequence. Just add a fade, the judge said, to mark the passage of time.
The jury would see clips of Grillo on a 47-inch screen.
They would see Grillo referring to Duarte as “a bimbo,” “illiterate immigrant” “a lettuce picker” “criminal.” “Mexican.” Out of order. Just a fade between them. It is a matter of record, though Judge Escalante tried to downplay it later that she permitted the jury to hear various versions of what was in effect the same clip more than 50 times during the trial.
But this was pretrial and the defense asked if they could explain the context of the clips – by telling the jury the questions that preceded his comments.
The comments stand by themselves, the judge ruled. No questions need be told to the jury.
Judge Silences Grillo: Defense Claims Trial by Soundbite
Rangel argued there’s no chronological integrity. There’s no clarity about what’s being asked or answered. One clip ends with, ‘Oh, so then you’re lying.’ But what came before that.
“This is classic undue prejudice.”
Judge Escalante acknowledged the clips showed Grillo making “terrible statements” and that it was “prejudice,” but not “undue prejudice.”
The relevance doesn’t depend on the question, she ruled. These clips go directly to the key issue: whether Mr. Grillo held discriminatory animus.
Rangel asked if Grillo could at least explain his definition of bimbo –that it came from what he’d heard about Duarte sleeping with other men at the sanctuary – not an overall bias against women. But rather a bias against adulterous women.
“No,” Escalante said. “He doesn’t get to say he called her a bimbo because he speculated about her private life.”
The defense argued the baby’s father wasn’t her husband.
“That’s speculation,” the judge said.
She ruled that Grillo could not explain why he used “bimbo.” Instead, she said the jury would just hear him refer to her as a bimbo while Nalbandyan claimed it was because he was prejudiced against women.
Judge Bars Jury from Learning Plaintiff’s Criminal History
The jury would also see Grillo refer to Duarte as “a criminal from Mexico”—but the defense could not tell the jury that she was, in fact, a criminal from Mexico.
Not counting theft, Duarte had committed the following:
Misuse of SSN 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(B) Felony Up to 5 yrs.
False tax forms 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Felony Up to 5 yrs.
Aggravated ID theft 18 U.S.C. § 1028A Felony Mandatory 2 yrs
Tax evasion 26 U.S.C. § 7201 Felony Up to 5 yrs
Illegal entry / overstaying 8 U.S.C. § 1325 Misdemeanor 6 mo.–2 yrs
CA forgery/perjury Cal. Penal Code §§ 470, 118 Felony Up to 4 yrs
Judge Escalante said it was all barred.
Judge Allows Damages Without Proof of Income
In a departure from standard legal practice, Judge Escalante allowed Duarte to sue for millions in lost income without requiring her to prove she had ever earned a legal wage.
Duarte presented no tax returns, W-2s, or 1099s—no documentation of income before her $15-an-hour job at DELTA Rescue.
The judge barred the defense from informing the jury that Duarte had never filed a tax return, never paid taxes, and never established legal eligibility to work in the United States.
This ruling would deprive the jury of the information necessary to evaluate the credibility of her damage claims.
The defense argued that without evidence of past earnings, a claim for future loss is speculative. By removing this foundation, Escalante invited the jury to award emotional damages untethered to economic reality.
She had scooped litter for two and a half years. She wanted a California jury to calculate what she would have earned if she hadn’t been “destroyed.”
The judge ruled her past didn’t matter. She needn’t prove she ever made money. The jury would never learn she’d never filed a return. Never paid a tax. Never shown legal eligibility to work in the country she was suing in.
Escalante Stacks the Deck: Jurors Admit Bias, Stay Anyway
The case was tried in October 2024 before Judge Kristin Escalante in Department 24 of the Los Angeles Superior Court in Courtroom 3C.
Jury selection.
Several women told Escalante they couldn’t be fair. They had lived it, they said—pregnant and afraid, fired or nearly fired. One woman said her boss once warned her not to get pregnant if she wanted to keep her job. Another said she wasn’t sure she could be impartial, but “understood” the plaintiff.
One said she cried while reading Duarte’s complaint. The judge kept all of them.
Juror 14 said the case “hit too close to home.” She couldn’t promise neutrality.
Juror 41, a Hispanic woman, said she’d once trained a man who got paid more. She told the court, “I might not be impartial.”
Juror 4 believed corporations “take what they can.”
Juror 17 said flat-out, “I’d never rule for a company. Even with no evidence.”
Judge Escalante let them all stay.
When someone voiced doubt about Duarte, the tone changed. For instance, juror 80 disliked large damage awards. Escalante excused him for cause. He was too biased to serve.
What emerged was a curated jury – nine women, eight Mexican Americans. No one who questioned million-dollar verdicts was left. No one who doubted the plaintiff remained.
Judge Escalante allowing openly biased jurors who favored the plaintiff to remain while excluding impartial ones who expressed skepticism—undermining the defendant’s right to a fair trial.
Nalbandyan Frames Case as Racism and Sexism
The trial began.
Adriana Duarte Valentines entered the courtroom with her four-year-old daughter –Avalos’s child – but the jury would never learn that. They were led to assume Raul Lopez was the father.
During Nalbandyan’s opening statement, the girl slept, curled beside her brother in the courtroom. Nalbandyan pointed her out to the jury. Duarte wept.
Nalbandyan described Duarte as humble. Hardworking. She described her marriage as one forged between childhood sweethearts married when they were 17 and faithful to each other for life.
“She and Raúl came to the United States to pursue the American Dream.” Then he described Duarte’s dream job at DELTA.
Nalbandyan: Over time, it became her calling. Her passion. Her identity…. They didn’t have to fire her. But they did.
Then he showed a video: Grillo from his deposition on a 47 inch screen. Bimbo. Lettuce Picker. Immigrant.
He went on – “the sexist and racist president—”
Rangel: Objection, Your Honor. Argument.
The Court: Overruled.
Nalbandyan: Even the sexist and racist president, the one I just showed you (on video), never said one bad thing about her work. Not once. Not in all the years she was there.
NALBANDYAN: Listen to this.
(Video played) Bimbo. Lettuce Picker. Illiterate. Mexican. Criminal.
NALBANDYAN: He has a racist view of Adriana. She’s a Mexican. An immigrant. He calls her, in his mind, a lettuce picker.
RANGEL: Objection, Your Honor. Argument.
THE COURT: Overruled.
NALBANDYAN: This lady never picked a thing in her life. Never worked a day in agriculture. She’s a proud Mexican. An immigrant. An American worker. A member of this community. But this man—still sees her that way. A lettuce picking Mexican. Because of his racism.
(Video played.) Lettuce Picker. Illiterate. Immigrant. Criminal.
NALBANDYAN: But also, he thought of her as a bimbo.
(Video played.) Lettuce Picker. Illiterate. Immigrant. Criminal. Mexican. Bimbo.
Nalbandyan: She loved the animals…. She went into labor. Texted from the hospital. Said she wouldn’t make it to work the next day. …She wanted to come back right away…. An hour later, he fired her….
(Video played.) Bimbo. Illiterate. Lettuce Picker. Criminal.
Alternating between video clips and classic character assassination, Nalbandyan was permitted to call Grillo a racist dozens of times.
Nalbandyan: Because of his racist views, thinking she’s an illiterate, lettuce-picking Mexican—he said she stole because she’s Mexican. She cried in the hospital… She didn’t sleep. Didn’t eat. Couldn’t hold the baby without remembering. She checked out on February 6. She could’ve come back the next day. But the job was gone. And something in her broke…. She falls into a deep depression. It hasn’t lifted.
Nalbandyan went on and on about her terrible grief – fantasy, and lies by omission.
Maybe he believed Duarte, or he was lying for her. But Escalante had set the stage with her pretrial rulings and the rigged jury. And she permitted him to go savage on Grillo. Anything goes and he was running with it.
Nalbandyan: She locked herself in her bedroom. Her family saw the change. She stopped talking. Her heart and mind were wrecked. Days became weeks. Weeks became months. Months became years. She lived in fear. Daily panic attacks. A belief something worse was coming.
Judge Greenlights Tape—Then Calls It Evidence
After a brief opening statement by Rangel, Nalbandyan began his case-in-chief.
Under California law, he was permitted to call Grillo, the defendant, as his witness. Grillo would appear live via Zoom, on the same 47-inch monitor the jury had seen him in the video clips.
But, before the jury would see Grillo live on Zoom, Nalbandyan wanted to make sure they saw yet another clip, a sort of greatest hits collection.
He would play a longer clip from Grillo’s deposition – saying the same things.
Defense counsel Rangel objected.
Rangel: The witness is present. This is irrelevant and cumulative.
Judge Escalante: Deposition testimony is valid.”
Nalbandyan played an extended clip from Grillo’s 2022 deposition.
Bimbo. Lettuce picker. Mexican criminal. Illiterate. Lettuce Picker. Criminal. Mexico. Lettuce Picker. Lettuce Picker. Bimbo.
After the clip ended, Nalbandyan turned to the court. “The plaintiff would like to call Leo Grillo as a witness.”
Grillo Answers After Damage Is Done
Grillo appeared on Zoom. The questions came.
Nalbandyan examined Grillo for two days. Hoping to shake him up. To get a repeat performance of the deposition. Nothing worked. Grillo remained calm.
Nalbandyan focused on Grillo not being certain about Duarte being pregnant as if doubting a liar’s pregnancy is the same thing as firing her because she is pregnant. He had done less well with Grillo live.
He had done his damage with the videos. And he planned to use them again and again till the jury would remember only the videos and not Grillo they saw live.
Rangel asked Grillo if he had ever fired someone for being Mexican?
“No.”
How many of his workers were Mexican?
“Over ninety percent.”
What would happen if he did fire people based on being Mexican?
“There’d be no operation,” he said.
Had he fired anyone for being pregnant?
“No.”
For asking for leave?
“No.”
For being disabled by pregnancy?
“No.”
When asked if he had a problem with Mexican, Grillo said his son-in-law was Mexican. His grandchildren were Mexican.
Rangel, brought up cats and pregnancy.
“Do you have a policy about pregnant women and cats?”
“Yes,” Grillo said. “Toxoplasmosis.”
He explained the parasite causes miscarriages. Birth defects. The policy was simple: if you’re pregnant, you stay away from the cats.
“We accommodate everyone,” he said. “We’re always short on help. We can’t afford to lose people.”
Courtroom or Daycare?
Throughout the trial, Nalbandyan hugged and held the little girl within view of the jury. He walked in front of the jury wiping away tears. He would go over to Duarte, rub her shoulders when she cried, and told the jury: “Ten million dollars for every tear.”
Eduardo, Duarte’s son, was present throughout the trial to watch the child as she was shown off to the jurors. He might have cared for the child at home. But they brought her every day, and better still, they dressed her in tattered clothes.
The defense finally objected to the child being in the courtroom.
Judge Escalante said that the child should not be in the courtroom anymore but she was pleased to allow the child to remain just outside the courtroom, in the hallway and at the lunchroom, where jurors could see her during breaks and recess.
The jurors got to see a lot of the child. In fact at the end of the trial one of the jurors bought the child a gift.
Duarte Takes the Stand
Adriana Duarte took the stand. She testified through a Spanish interpreter. Most of the jury spoke Spanish and so she got to testify in her own voice and her own words and then through the words of the translator.
What was not put into the record was her tears.
She testified for three days and she cried every day, cried every hour. Her love for the cats was so intense, it might be true that no 15 minute period elapsed without some snivel.
Being fired from DELTA Rescue, she said, made her feel like “a failure.”
She claimed she sealed herself “in a capsule” after receiving the termination email from Grillo. She spoke of depression, sleepless nights, and guilt about not being able to support her children.
“Everything crumbled,” she said. “The plans, my dreams.”
She told the jury that her little daughter helped her heal. But the job she loved—feeding cats, cleaning litter – was gone. On good days, she spent time with her children. On bad days, she said, she remembered the job and mourned its loss.
Then came the question.
Had she ever worked in a lettuce field?
“No.”
Had she ever done agricultural labor?
“No.”
Had she heard that Leo Grillo once called her a “lettuce picker”?
“Not until I saw the deposition video,” she said.
And how did that make you feel?
“If I was a lettuce picker, it would be good.”
Husband Testifies
Duarte’s husband, Raul Lopez, took the stand. He offered a fable of a grieving and loyal wife. He said his wife came home from the hospital and collapsed emotionally. Curtains drawn. TV on mute. Food untouched. She locked herself in the bedroom and stayed there for weeks.
“She missed the cats,” Lopez said.
Not the boyfriend. Not the money. He didn’t say why he never visited her in the hospital. He didn’t mention how he chased her lover.
“How has Adriana been this past year?”
“She’s a shadow of the woman she used to be,” Lopez said.
The Expert Who Never Met the Plaintiff
The plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Anthony Reading took the stand and told the jury that losing her job at DELTA Rescue was a “pivotal psychological event.”
“She hasn’t been the same since,” he said.
According to Reading, Duarte cried constantly, couldn’t sleep, and had trouble thinking clearly.
“She had no joy,” he testified. “Her self-worth was gone.”
He diagnosed her with “adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood,” a condition he claimed psychologists can retroactively identify.
Had he ever met Duarte in person?
“No.”
His diagnosis was based on a single three-hour Zoom call, conducted four years after Duarte left DELTA—through a certified interpreter.
Duarte never saw a psychiatrist. She never went to therapy. She never pursued any formal treatment. His diagnosis relied solely on Duarte’s self-report, without exploring alternative explanations for her distress.
On cross-examination, Reading admitted he did quite a few of these retroactive diagnoses. He had served as an expert witness 150 times in the past year. He charged $4,000 for half a day in court. (That’s earnings of $600,000/year for testimony alone).
The “Economist” Who Assumed Too Much
Next up: Timothy James Lanning, the plaintiff’s economist.
He told the jury Duarte had lost $240,000 in past wages and would lose another $776,000 between now and age 60½.
Total economic damages: one million dollars.
Lanning assumed Duarte would never work again—not even at minimum wage.
She had worked at DELTA for 2½ years, scooping cat litter at $15 an hour. Somehow that translated into a million-dollar wage loss.
“Have you ever met Ms. Duarte?”
“No.”
“Do you know what she did before DELTA?”
“No.”
It was pure conjecture inadmissible under Evidence Code § 352.
He didn’t factor in her duty to seek other work. He assumed permanent unemployment—with no evidence to support that.
Mitigation of damages is required. Duarte couldn’t just sit home and wait for a jury check.
But that was the case for the plaintiff.
The Defense Tries to Show Falsity of Sexism/Racism Claim
The defense called eight DELTA workers. Seven Hispanic. They all said they never heard Leo Grillo say anything bad about Mexicans. Or pregnant women. None of them knew of anyone being fired for being Mexican.
Four of the eight workers talked about getting pregnant. About being moved away from the cats because that was the rule. About taking leave. About coming back when their babies were born.
Duarte’s manager Steven Spears testified that if Adriana had told him she was pregnant, he would have reassigned her, given her leave, and made sure she and the baby were safe.
Enrique Estrada Grillo’s son-in-law—said he never saw Grillo prejudiced against any Mexican including him or Grillo’s grandkids – which were Estrada’s children.
The absurdity was striking. Here was a man, Grillo, being called a racist, a man who hated Hispanics, and fired a poor honest Mexican worker named Duarte because of his hatred – and Grillo had spent his life with Mexicans- workers at DELTA for 45 years, and his son-in-law was Mexican and his grandkids were Mexican. He supported aniumal no kill rescues – satellites in Mexico – but he was the racist because a savage unfit judge saw fit to let the jury interpret lettuce picker – something specific to Duarte and her lies – as a wholesale proof of racism.
It was outrageous.
And the cruel irony was this would hurt the dogs and cats and even the 35 or so Mexican workers at DELTA more than Grillo.
The testimony of Grillo continued. But it is doubtful the jury was really listening.
Grillo stated that no employee had ever been fired for being pregnant or requesting leave.
He stated that pregnancy posters and labor law notices were posted throughout the sanctuary – warning women of the risk of toxoplasmosis.
Closing Argument Turns Trial Into Civil-Rights Spectacle
Between the opening and the closing, the Grillo clips had been played some 50 times.
Judge Escalante also allowed Nalbandyan to play it again during his closing statement.
Nalbandyan in his closing spoke in emotional terms which was apt since that was Judge Esclante engineered for this case.
Nalbandyan spoke of Martin Luther King Jr. and César Chávez.
“Dr. King… gave his life for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.”
“César Chávez fought so farmworkers could labor with dignity.”
Neither man had championed off-the-books theft, fake Social Security numbers, or tax evasion, yet their images served as moral ballast for a plaintiff who did all three—conduct the jury was never allowed to hear.
“This is Los Angeles… the proud Mexican American capital of the country,” he said to the mostly Mexican American jury.
“When you deliberate, decide what is acceptable in this community.”
Duarte had used a phony SS number, never paid taxes, and sold stolen pet supplies. Her “lost wages” came from an economist assuming lifelong unemployment. Her mental-health diagnosis rested on a three-hour Zoom call.
But Nalbandyan wrapped Duarte in civil-rights iconography.
He invoked Martin Luther King Jr. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”—and Grillo was the injustice Dr. King warned about.
Nalbandyan painted Duarte as a modern civil-rights heroine and the defense as oppressors.
Grillo had fired a woman caught stealing, lying, and manipulating. But in this courtroom, he was guilty of discrimination because of a few words taken out of context, captured on video, two years after he fired her for stealing.
The jury had seen more of Grillo’s deposition outbursts than any other evidence. Grillo wasn’t allowed to explain, contextualize, or defend what he’d said.
Nalbandyan assured them it didn’t matter.
“Imagine he said all those things in court,” he said. “Well, the law says that’s exactly how you have to treat it.”
What he left out was that the deposition had been clipped, repeated, and weaponized—a highlight reel of worst moments, out of a six-hour deposition – played for maximum emotional impact and minimum fairness.
Judge Escalante had let it all in, over defense objections.
And in the middle of his closing., with the judge’s consent, he replayed another version of the same deposition clip the jury had seen on loop all through the trial:
Bimbo. Lettuce picker. Illiterate.
Nalbandyan reminded the jury of his own examination of Grillo:
Q: “When you fired her, you thought she was making up the pregnancy—true?”
A: “Possibly.”
Nalbandyan told the jury to treat that single word—“Possibly”—as proof that Grillo fired Duarte because she was pregnant.
Doubting whether someone is pregnant is not the same as firing them because they are pregnant.
But Nalbandyan focused on doubt.
He said that Grillo was the type who would even doubt actor Christopher Reeve if he was paralyzed.
Nalbandyan told the jurors that using the word “bimbo” is a terminable offense “anywhere in the world.”
Then they played the deposition clip again. Bimbo. Lettuce Picker. Mexican. Criminal.
“Bottom line,” he said, “the guy lost his mind because a ‘bimbo lettuce-picker Mexican’ got pregnant… He fired her because he thought she was faking the pregnancy.”
Grillo, Scorpion, Duarte, Frog: Drama Ends in Parable
Then Nalbandyan concluded with a fable.
“Let me tell you the story of the scorpion and the frog,” he began. A scorpion begs a frog to carry him across a pond. The frog hesitates—afraid the scorpion will sting him. The scorpion insists he won’t. Halfway across, he stings the frog anyway. As they both drown, the scorpion says, “It’s in my nature.”
“This fable teaches,” Nalbandyan said, “that vicious people cannot resist hurting others, even when it’s not in their interest.”
Duarte was the innocent frog.
Nalbandyan’s scorpion-fable implied that Grillo was evil by nature, incapable of doing anything but harm — even when it harmed himself.
Judge Escalante could have interrupted Nalbandyan’s classic “character assassination.”
But she didn’t.
Grillo on Trial, Facts Left Outside
It was a hell of a trial. The jury saw tears. They heard about love and loss of cats. Because Leo Grillo, the man who had spent 40 years rescuing animals, did not let her return. Because he hated Mexicans and women.
They heard she was denied dignity.
But they did not hear how she entered the country.
They didn’t hear she entered the system only to exploit it.
They did not hear what she took.
They did not hear what she lied about.
Instead, they saw a child. They saw clips.
They judged a man by his worst words, not her worst deeds.
The truth wasn’t barred. It was buried.
The Verdict:
The jury, sent to deliberate, quickly reached its decision.
They awarded Adriana Duarte $16,002 in lost wages for her time at DELTA Rescue.
They added $180,950 in future economic damages—wages Duarte might have earned if she had looked for work again.
For her grief over being separated from the cats, the jury gave her $5.5 million – in non-economic damages.
Then they went further: $1 million more in punitive damages—because Grillo used offensive language in a deposition.
A total of $6.7 million. Roughly 100 years of wages for two-and-a-half years of scooping cat litter and feeding cats. Far more than what most plaintiffs who lose a limb or an eye or die get.
She Loved the Cats—Then Drove Sanctuary into Bankruptcy
Following the verdict, the defense filed a motion seeking a new trial. Judge Escalante denied the request.
But she wrote 34 pages anyway, because that’s what judges do when they want to sound reasonable while ruining a not for profit.
Judge Escalante, perhaps conscious of the optics, reduced the damages from $6.7 million to $3 million – still enough to bankrupt a no-kill sanctuary.
Following the verdict, attorney Nalbandyan filed judgment and initiated efforts to freeze DELTA Rescue’s bank accounts and seize its property.
DELTA, cornered, invoked Chapter 11 bankruptcy which temporarily halted collection efforts.
As it stands, Duarte, thew woman who loved cats so much, forced DELTA into bankruptcy and remains unpaid.
For now, the sanctuary holds.
If DELTA can hang on, justice might still be possible. If the appeal works——maybe justice shows up late.
Can DELTA Survive the Woman Who Looted It?
Leo Grillo has vowed never to abandon the animals currently in his care, regardless of the legal or financial challenges ahead. But the shadows stretch long.
Because there’s a woman—Duarte—who says she deserves what was meant for the cats she loved so hard.
Nalbandyan and Escalante want the money meant for the dogs and cats given to the lady who sold their food at flea markets. She would take from the blind dogs. From the three-legged cats. From the horses with nowhere left to run.
Duarte and Nalbandyan lined up for the payday, reaching into the bowl meant for the animals. High on a ridge in Acton, dogs sleep in straw homes. Cats purr in tiny cottages, above the dust and cruelty of the world, safe at last.
Duarte —a thief, a liar, and grifter—wants the money meant for animals. And unless someone stops it, she might get it.
A Final Word – an Appeal to the President Donald Trump
Mr. President, Deport Her—Before She Destroys What’s Left
Adriana Duarte entered this country illegally, submitted a fake Social Security number (a felony under 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(C)), and used it to gain employment at DELTA Rescue—a no-kill animal sanctuary funded entirely by private donations. She lied, she stole, and she worked off the books while selling stolen pet supplies for cash. Then, when caught, she sued the sanctuary that gave her a chance—and walked away with a $3 million judgment, enough to bankrupt it. Under federal law—8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(3)(B)—she is subject to immediate deportation for crimes involving fraud and false documents.
Mr. President, we are asking you to intervene. Not for politics. For animals. The dogs, cats, and horses at DELTA Rescue depend on every dollar, every ounce of care. Duarte took what wasn’t hers. She lied to the government. She lied to the court. And now she wants to take the future from the animals she claimed to love. Deport her—not just because the law demands it, but because justice and mercy demand it too.
Let her go.
Let the animals stay.
