DA declines to file charges against Valencia chiropractor  

The Joint Chiropractic on McBean Parkway at the Promenade in Valencia. 051624 Katherine Quezada/The Signal
The Joint Chiropractic on McBean Parkway at the Promenade in Valencia. 051624 Katherine Quezada/The Signal
Share
Tweet
Email

The L.A. County District Attorney’s Office has rejected the initial filing of a case against a Valencia chiropractor arrested on suspicion he filmed people using a camera in the restroom of the office he practiced out of on McBean Parkway, according to documents obtained by The Signal. 

Nicholas Vanderhyde, 41, of Valencia, was arrested June 4, after detectives with the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station investigated a video camera found by an employee of The Joint Chiropractic. 

On Oct. 29, the DA’s Office responded to a request for comment by stating, “A case remains under review,” and stated the following day, there was no information to share, in response to whether the case had been assigned to a prosecutor.  

On Wednesday, the charge-evaluation worksheet dated Oct. 31 and signed by Deputy District Attorney Jeffrey Greenberg was shared with The Signal.  

“(The L.A. County Sheriff’s Department) recovered the camera recording device and reviewed the video footage captured, which depicts several individuals including persons identified as female and male employees, and patients/guests of the location (some of whom were juvenile), using the restroom at various times over an extended period of time,” according to the worksheet. 

The camera was attached to a battery source and placed toward the rear of a cabinet, which an employee reported seeing after she placed her keys on the cabinet, according to court records associated with one of three lawsuits that followed the camera’s discovery. 

“The (investigating officer) conducted an extensive investigation, which included a search warrant executed at suspect’s residence, where several electronic devices (phones, computers, hard drives, tablets) were collected as evidence for forensic analysis,” the narrative continues,  “suspect was identified as the possible perpetrator, due to partial capture of a male individual’s face on a few of the recordings, appearing to adjust the camera recording device; the face of this individual resembles the suspect.” 

The charge sheet notes a phone conversation in which Greenberg advised the detective that he did not think the footage was good enough. The detective indicated that other avenues of the investigation are ongoing, including analyses of digital devices seized during the service of a search warrant in June. 

“Charges are declined at this time based on insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial, that the perpetrator as partially depicted in the video footage is one and the same as suspect Vanderhyde,” according to the sheet. 

Greenberg was not immediately available to respond to a request for comment Wednesday, nor were SCV Sheriff’s Station officials. 

Related To This Story

Latest NEWS