Opinion: Sheriff’s office must investigate alleged rapes at Otay detention center

San Diego County deserves a direct, public explanation, and so far it has not received one.

When credible allegations of sexual assault or rape arise inside a contracted ICE detention facility operating in this county, why is the San Diego County Sheriff’s Office not stepping forward to conduct an independent criminal investigation?

In every other comparable setting — airports, hospitals, schools or any publicly contracted service — serious criminal allegations are investigated by law enforcement, not by the entity accused of wrongdoing. That is not just best practice; it is the baseline for preserving evidence, protecting victims, and ensuring accountability.

Yet here, the standard appears to change.

Instead of immediate, independent law enforcement intervention, responsibility is effectively deferred to the facility itself. That approach would be unacceptable anywhere else. You do not allow a private contractor to investigate its own potential felonies, particularly when those allegations involve the most serious violations of personal safety and human dignity.

The inconsistency becomes even more troubling when viewed against the sheriff’s own practices. The department continues to investigate deaths that occur inside its own jails — cases where independence is already a central concern — while resisting meaningful transparency and outside oversight. At the same time, the sheriff’s office has historically recognized the importance of impartiality by agreeing to investigate officer-involved shootings from other jurisdictions, a practice designed to build public trust by avoiding conflicts of interest.

That raises a fundamental question: why is independence acknowledged as essential when reviewing another agency’s conduct, but set aside when allegations arise inside a federally contracted detention facility within this county?

Sexual assault is not an administrative matter. It is a serious felony. It requires trained investigators, immediate scene control, proper evidence preservation, victim-centered protocols and a clear path to prosecution. Internal reviews conducted by a facility with a direct stake in the outcome do not meet that standard. They risk compromised evidence, delayed reporting and outcomes that erode confidence in the justice system.

This is not a theoretical concern. Detention environments — whether county-run or federally contracted — carry inherent power imbalances, restricted access and limited external visibility. Those conditions increase the need for independent oversight, not reduce it. When allegations arise in such settings, the response must be stronger, faster and more transparent than in the community, not weaker.

The sheriff’s office cannot claim comprehensive law enforcement authority across San Diego County while carving out exceptions in places where accountability is most critical. Jurisdiction does not disappear at the doors of a contracted detention facility. Neither do constitutional protections.

If anything, the responsibility is greater.

San Diego County residents, and the individuals held in custody within its borders, deserve clarity. They deserve to know that serious crimes will be investigated by independent law enforcement professionals, regardless of who operates the facility or who is detained inside it. They deserve consistency in the application of the law.

And they deserve an answer to a simple question: why does the standard change here?

Until that question is addressed, the message being sent is unmistakable — that accountability depends on the setting, and that in some places, the law is allowed to look the other way.

That is not a system built on justice. It is a system that invites its erosion.

David Myers is a retired San Diego Sheriff’s commander with 35 years law enforcement experience.

Want to submit a letter to the editor, guest column or opinion piece? Find our guidelines and submission form here.