Couple alleges their reputations remain damaged and that Christian Ziegler has experienced loss of much of his personal business
The former chair of the Republican Party of Florida and his wife, a Sarasota County School Board member, have filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Sarasota, contending that their reputations have not recovered from a Sarasota Police Department investigation two years ago that revealed the couple’s engagement in sexual activity with other women.
Moreover, the complaint says that the personal business of Christian Ziegler — who also served one term on the Sarasota County Commission — “continues to struggle and he has failed to achieve the same levels of business he attained prior to the [Sarasota Police Department’s] investigation.” Further, the complaint says that it cost Christian and Bridget Ziegler “hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees” to win a state court case that they filed in the aftermath of the law enforcement agency’s investigation.
They argue in the federal complaint that the “City’s policies … and customs violated Mr. Ziegler’s fourth, fifth and fourteenth amendment rights” and “Mrs. Ziegler’s fourth and fourteenth amendment rights.” The complaint adds, “[T]he Zieglers have sustained general damages consisting of pain, suffering, anxiety, and other physical and emotional damages ins such sums as shall be determined.”
The complaint includes two Sarasota Police Department detectives — Angela Cox and Maria Llovio — as defendants, the document shows.
The Zieglers are seeking a jury trial; compensatory damages, including lost wages and attorney’s fees for the complaint they pursued against the city in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court; non-economic awards for their “mental anguish, pain and suffering, and humiliation and embarrassment”; punitive damages against the two Sarasota Police Department detectives; and “reasonable attorney’s fees,” as provided for in the United States Code.
Sarasota City Attorney Joe Polzak reported the filing of the couple’s civil rights complaint to the City Commission during its regular meeting on Nov. 3. “As of this date,” he added, “it has not been formally served.”
Records of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, in Tampa, show that the complaint was filed on Oct. 31 by attorneys Mathew Seth Sarelson and Zachary Stoner of the Dhillon Law Group of West Palm Beach, The Sarasota News Leader found.
When it becomes appropriate, Polzak also told the city commissioners on Nov. 3, he would request a special, private session with them to discuss strategy, as allowed by state law. In the meantime, he added, “I’ll continue to update you as developments occur.”
The case has been assigned to Senior Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell, court records show. Wikipedia notes that President Barack Obama appointed her.
‘Profound abuse of official power’
The complaint alleges that the city and the two detectives, Cox and Llovio, are guilty of “a profound abuse of official power and clear instance of investigative misconduct [as they] withheld critical exculpatory evidence from judicial review, obtained and executed excessively overbroad search warrants that invaded Mr. Ziegler’s private digital records, and intentionally included deeply personal marital communications in public police reports — conduct that systematically dismantled the Zieglers’ protections against unreasonable searches, seizures, and deprivations of privacy and due process, while inflicting severe and enduring harm on their family, professional lives, and reputations. Plaintiffs seek complete redress for these unconstitutional abuses, including compensatory and punitive damages, to ensure accountability and prevent future violations of citizens’ fundamental rights.”
The lawsuit points out that Christian Ziegler served as a county commissioner from 2018 to 2022; that he was vice chair of the Florida Republican Party from 2019 until 2023; and that in February 2023, he was elected chair of the party. It adds that Bridget Ziegler “has served on the Sarasota County School Board since 2014” and that she also is on the Board of Supervisors for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District,” to which Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her.
Further, she is identified in the complaint as a co-founder of Moms for Liberty.
The complaint adds, “Due to their status as prominent conservative figures, both Christian and Bridget are often the victims of harassment by liberal activists.”
Then, the complaint explains, on Oct. 4, 2023, a woman filed a report with the Sarasota Police Department (SPD), “claiming that Mr. Ziegler assaulted her in her home on October 2, 2023.” It adds, “SPD was first made aware of the potential allegations when a friend of the alleged
victim contacted Detective Llovio. The alleged victim did not want to come forward or press charges. Nevertheless, Detective Llovio pressured her into doing so.”
After the agency opened a criminal investigation into the allegations, the complaint continues, Cox was named the lead investigator, with Llovio and a detective sergeant assigned to assist her.
On Oct. 25, 2023, while Cox and Llovio interviewed the accuser at her home, the complaint says, they received permission to search the woman’s cell phone “and perform a digital extraction of [its] contents.” Upon review of those contents, the complaint adds, “SPD learned of Mrs. Ziegler’s possible involvement in the allegations.”
Two days later — on Oct. 27 — Detectives Cox and Llovio “met with the accuser and conducted a series of recorded messages and phone calls with Mr. Ziegler. By conducting the controlled phone calls and text messages Detectives Cox and Llovio were ‘hoping to trick’ Mr. Ziegler into confessing to the crime he was accused of,” the complaint contends.
Then, on Nov. 1, it continues, the detectives met briefly with Bridget Ziegler at her office and came to the conclusion that she “was not directly involved with the allegations,” so they “did not seek any further information from her.”
The same day, Detective Cox and the SPD sergeant — identified only as Riffe in the complaint — met with Christian Ziegler and his attorney, Derek Byrd; Byrd told them that Ziegler had a video that would exonerate him. Riffe agreed to meet with Byrd the next morning to review the video, the complaint says.
Nonetheless, the lawsuit continues, Cox and Llovio prepared a search warrant for all data on Christian Ziegler’s cell phone, “regardless of its potential relevance to SPD’s investigation.” Cox and Llovio drafted an affidavit that summarized the evidence they had obtained by that point, “including a detailed description of the alleged sexual assault, summary of controlled calls and messages between Mr. Ziegler and the accuser, and a summary of SPD’s interview with Mrs. Ziegler.”
When Cox sent the proposed warrant to the State Attorney’s Office that night for approval, the complaint points out, she “failed to mention the existence of the exculpatory video.”
Then, about 10:30 p.m., “the State Attorney’s Office approved the proposed warrant, and it was sent to Judge Thomas Krug for signature. Judge Krug signed the warrant shortly before midnight on November 1,” the complaint says.
“Detective Llovio would later testify that neither she nor Detective Cox thought it was important to go back to Judge Krug and advise him of the exculpatory video on Mr. Ziegler’s phone,” the complaint adds. “She further testified that it was not normal practice or policy of the SPD to return to a judge and advise him of any exculpatory evidence discovered prior to execution of a search warrant.”
On Nov. 2, when Cox, Llovio and Riffe met with Christian Ziegler and his attorney, Byrd, Ziegler showed them the video on his cell phone, the complaint continues. “The exculpatory nature of the video was immediately apparent to everyone who viewed the video,” the complaint contends. “All SPD officers who were present at Attorney Byrd’s office later testified that upon viewing the video, they immediately knew it exonerated Mr. Ziegler of the accusations against him.”
The complaint further points out, “Mr. Ziegler offered to provide the video to the SPD officers, but the officers refused. Apparently, there were concerns about verifying the date of the video. SPD presented him with the overly broad warrant for the entirety of Mr. Ziegler’s cell phone, not just the video.”
The complaint adds, “Even assuming the search warrant was lawful when it was signed by the judge, the facts on the ground so fundamentally changed and undermined the warrant that executing it constituted a due process violation.”
The detectives and Sgt. Riffe proceeded to seize Ziegler’s cell phone, “pursuant to the search warrant,” and the detectives advised him and Byrd “that they were forced to download the entire contents of [the] phone, including personal photos and videos and data completely unrelated to SPD’s investigation. However, the Detectives stated that they would limit their search to the video and a specific message the accuser sent Mr. Ziegler.”
The complaint points out that the Police Department “has a policy of seizing and searching an entire cell phone without due regard to the cell phone owner’s right to maintain the confidentiality of attorney-client privileged or spousal privileged communications.”
After Ziegler advised them “that he had private communications with his wife on the phone,” the complaint continues, the SPD personnel told him they would be looking only for the video and communications with the accuser “and would otherwise be limited to the time of the alleged incident.”
The download of the cell phone data “took five days to complete,” the complaint emphasizes, as the SPD personnel “downloaded Mr. Ziegler’s entire internet search history,” which included 30,417 videos, 473,199 photos, and roughly 1,200 text messages.”
Moreover, it points out, even though the detectives said they would limit their search to the “video and a specific message between Mr. Ziegler and his accuser, [they] rummaged through all of the Electronically Stored Information (ESI) that was downloaded from Mr. Ziegler’s cell phone. The Detectives’ review of the downloaded material expanded to videos, photographs, and messages created years before the alleged conduct involving Mr. Ziegler’s accuser. Of course, none of this material was identified in the warrant that Judge Krug signed off on,” the complaint says.
The detectives “then flagged any pictures or videos they thought were relevant and put them in a separate folder to review,” the complaint adds. During the 12th Judicial Circuit Court case that the Zieglers initiated, the complaint continues, the detectives “testified they flagged and transferred completely unrelated personal pictures and texts that were created years before the date of the alleged incident.”
The detectives also stated at some point that SPD “has no policy requiring a ‘taint team,’ or group of individuals who are responsible for ensuring no confidential or sensitive information is reviewed by the SPD during the process of extracting ESI from a cell phone,” the complaint further points out.
Going after Google Drive materials
After the detectives were unable to locate the exculpatory video, the complaint continues, they prepared a warrant on Nov. 13, 2023, for Ziegler’s Google Drive account, with the intention of finding that video. “Despite Mr. Ziegler’s prior offer to surrender the video,” the complaint says, “neither Detective Cox nor Detective Llovio contacted Mr. Ziegler for a copy of the video. Instead, the Detectives intentionally chose to continue their baseless and illegal search into Mr. Ziegler’s personal life.”
Moreover, the complaint points out, their Google Drive warrant “was overly broad.” It had no limitation, the complaint says, adding, “Essentially, Detectives Cox and Llovio were seeking unfettered access to rummage through Mr. Ziegler’s Google Drive.”
The affidavit written in support of the Google Drive search also failed to mention the exculpatory video, the complaint says.
“In response to the warrant,” the complaint continues, “Google provided all of the requested information.” Yet, the complaint says, the detectives still were unable to locate that video.
Finally, “[a]fter downloading and gaining access to Mr. Ziegler’s entire life, SPD,” the complaint adds, the detectives “decided to take Mr. Ziegler up on his offer and agreed to meet with him in person to extract the exculpatory video from his computer.” When they met with him on Dec. 1, 2023, the complaint says, Ziegler “voluntarily provided them with his computer,” so they could extract the video. They were able to confirm “that the video was taken the day of October 2, 2023, and ceased investigating Mr. Ziegler for assault.”
The complaint points out, “SPD could have done this on November 2, 2023 … without violating Mr. Ziegler’s constitutional rights …”
Then the complaint says that “SPD was not done harassing Mr. Ziegler and his family. Upon completing its investigation into the allegations of assault, SPD began investigating Mr. Ziegler for video voyeurism under the theory that he recorded the accuser without her consent.”
The Meta/Instagram search warrant
The detectives were able to get another search warrant that was directed to Meta/Instagram to search through Ziegler’s user accounts, the complaint continues. Once more, it notes, no limits on the findings were included in that warrant. “Meta/Instagram produced everything requested, but none of it was helpful to SPD’s investigation,” the complaint adds.
Although SPD, on Jan. 19, 2024, referred to the State Attorney’s Office a charge of video voyeurism against Ziegler, the complaint says, on March 6, 2024, that office declined to formally charge Ziegler.
Yet, the complaint points out, by then, the damage had been done to the Zieglers and their family. “In January 2024, Mr. Ziegler was forced to step down from his position as Chair of the Florida Republican Party. Additionally, Mr. Ziegler lost a significant amount of work for his political consulting business. Mrs. Ziegler was forced to resign from her position at the Leadership Institute.” The website of the latter organization says that it “turns conservatives into leaders — empowered to advance their conservative principles.”
Although the Zieglers were successful in their 12th Circuit Court lawsuit against the city and 12th Judicial District State Attorney Ed Brodsky, the complaint says, that is on appeal to Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal, even though neither the City of Sarasota nor Brodsky contested the lawsuit’s contention that the SPD warrants “were illegal.”
The appellants in the Second District Court of Appeal case are the Florida Center for Government Accountability; Sarasota resident Michael Barfield, who works with the Florida Center; Gannett Co.; the McClatchy Co. LLC; and Scripps Media, court documents show. The appeal was filed on Aug. 2, 2024.