As Los Angeles County braces for another bruising race for Sheriff, one candidate stands out for all the wrong reasons: Eric Strong. Once positioned as a reform-minded alternative within LASD, Strong’s record has become mired in allegations of civil rights violations, toxic leadership, and credibility concerns that raise serious questions about his fitness to hold the county’s top law enforcement post.
Multiple sources inside both LASD and LA County Probation confirm that Supervisor Holly J. Mitchell allegedly hand-picked Lt. Eric Strong to enter the race for Sheriff, not to win, but to sabotage.
According to sources, the move was a calculated political ploy: Mitchell’s objective was to water down votes and derail incumbent Sheriff Alex Villanueva, during his re-election bid. The scheme had an added layer of irony, given that Villanueva and Strong had a contentious relationship at the Lennox Station, a fact well-known throughout the department.
As a payoff for agreeing to run, Mitchell allegedly leaned on Sheriff Robert Luna to “loan” Strong to the LA County Probation Department under the guise of proving his leadership credentials. The idea, sources say, was to manufacture a résumé booster, a staged assignment that could later justify a promotion inside LASD or tee him up for another run at Sheriff.
Strong was installed as Chief of Safety at the Probation Department, a role that critics argue was less about public safety and more about political theater, designed to burnish his credibility after an election bid that never stood on its own merits.
The decision to run is counterintuitive to the Board’s agenda: if they continue backing Sheriff Robert Luna’s re-election bid, Strong will likely siphon votes from him, ultimately strengthening former Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s position in the 2026 race.
Strong’s name has surfaced in multiple multi-million-dollar legal actions targeting the County. In one case, a Probation Supervisor filed a $10 million claim alleging unlawful detainment, violation of federal and state rights, and intimidation—directly naming Strong as a central figure. The claim asserts that Strong abused his authority during joint operations, using intimidation and harassment rather than collaboration to achieve objectives. Strong eventually left Probation under a cloud of scrutiny as a result of multiple scandals.
Strong has been accused of dodging service in the lawsuit, raising further questions about accountability and transparency. Both cases allege disturbing patterns of abuse, misuse of authority, and behavior inconsistent with the standards expected of someone seeking the Sheriff’s office.
The problems with Strong are not confined to the courtroom. According to testimony and commentary from within LASD and Probation, Strong has long been viewed as a divisive and combative figure. In a comment attributed to a Probation Officer (DPO Richard Bread) on WitnessLA, Strong is described as “arrogant, self-important and a bully” who quickly alienated colleagues by barking orders, insulting leadership, and creating resentment rather than fostering cooperation.
Rather than strengthening partnerships, Strong allegedly undermined existing teams, attempted to seize control, and created his own unit that “fumbled numerous investigations under his direct guidance.” The post concludes with a stinging observation: “If you have a problem with everybody else, you yourself are probably the problem”.
Another WitnessLA comment, posted under the alias “Sweaty Balls”, goes even further, accusing Strong and his wife, an LASD lieutenant, of hypocrisy, financial improprieties, and playing the race card when convenient. The commenter alleges that Strong was “never tapped by BOS to run” and that his campaign was a non-starter until political insiders propped him up to siphon votes.
Perhaps most damning is the recurring theme: Strong appears to have no meaningful base of support within LASD or Probation. Multiple accounts describe supervisors, managers, and peers unwilling to defend him publicly, citing his reputation for intimidation and bullying. One veteran insider remarked that despite Strong’s long tenure in law enforcement, “not a single person speaks well of him.”
Strong’s candidacy comes amid widespread dissatisfaction with current Sheriff Robert Luna, whose administration has been rocked by scandals, suicides, and union turmoil.
His critics argue that his only qualification being leveraged is his race, a claim underscored by his third-place finish in the 2022 primary. Far from uniting the department, Strong is portrayed as a polarizing figure whose presence exacerbates division rather than healing it.
As Strong positions himself for another run, the mountain of allegations trailing him cannot be ignored. With pending lawsuits, multi-million-dollar claims, allegations of civil rights abuses, and insider accounts of failed leadership, Strong is burdened with liabilities that would cripple any reform agenda he claims to represent.
For voters already weary of the scandals and instability plaguing LASD, the only thing “strong” about Eric Strong is his last name, certainly not his record or legacy.
Follow Us