A federal jury has found Los Angeles County Sheriff
It is the first time a jury has held Baca personally at fault in a deputy use-of-force case. Sheriff's officials called the verdict a "huge mistake" and said they would appeal.
Plaintiff Tyler Willis filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in October 2010, alleging that deputies severely beat him in 2009 while he was an inmate awaiting trial.
Willis alleged that he was punched and kicked repeatedly, shot with a Taser multiple times and struck "numerous times" in the ankle with a heavy metal flashlight, causing fractures and head injuries.
After a weeklong trial, the jury returned last week with a verdict in Willis' favor. They found that the conduct of Deputies Anthony Vasquez, Mark Farino and Pedro Guerrero, Capt. Daniel Cruz and Sheriff Baca had been "malicious, oppressive or in reckless disregard" of Willis' rights.
The defendants agreed this week to divide $165,000 in punitive damages among themselves, with Baca paying $100,000.
Willis' attorneys argued that Baca had failed to heed warnings that letting deputies use heavy flashlights to control inmates could cause serious injuries. They also pointed to findings by a citizens' commission convened to study violence in the county jails, which found that Baca had failed to control use of force in the facilities.
"I think it speaks volumes that members of the jury heard the evidence and said, 'This goes all the way to the top,' " said Mark Pachowicz, one of Willis' attorneys.
Attorneys who represented the Sheriff's Department in the case did not respond to messages seeking comment, but sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said the department plans to appeal the verdict.
He said that the use of force was "brought on by the inmate" and that deputies had acted within policy. He also contended that the jury had erred in considering the jail commission findings when they decided Baca was personally liable.
"We respect juries, but they made a mistake," Whitmore said. "This is a mistake that needs to be rectified, and rectified quickly, and we will."
It is unusual, but not unheard of, for a jury to find the head of a law enforcement agency liable for the actions of rank-and-file officers.
In 1992, a federal jury found then-L.A. Police Chief Daryl F. Gates and nine officers liable for $44,001 in damages in connection with a deadly shooting. A special unit within the police force shot and killed three suspects and wounded a fourth after a robbery of a McDonald's restaurant.
The jurors said they assessed the relatively low damages in order to not reward the families of criminals while at the same time sending a message that the controversial special unit responsible for the shooting needed to be revamped.
In that case, almost half of the damages were assigned to Gates, but the Los Angeles City Council voted to pay the awards. A federal appeals court later upheld the right of the council to shield police officers from punitive damages awarded in excessive-force cases.
In order to "indemnify officers" in this way, it must be found that the employees were acting within the course and scope of their employment and acting without malice. It must also be determined that paying the damages would be in the best interest of the public entity.