Open L.A. County’s jails — to scrutiny

Last week, I added my name to a letter to Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. asking for a federal investigation into disturbing reports of assaults on inmates by L.A. County sheriff’s deputies in jails.

I have no idea what a neutral and objective investigation will reveal, but for the sake of the public, the Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Lee Baca himself, a thorough investigation is crucial.

Managing a large network of custodial facilities like L.A. County’s jail system is a gargantuan task, and it is complicated by the fact that many inmates have not only committed crimes but also have serious drug, alcohol and/or mental health issues. But county residents expect — rightly — those who work in jail facilities to be well-trained professionals, committed to keeping the peace even when confronted with inflammatory situations.

When the community starts to lose faith in law enforcers, it is crucial that the situation be fully investigated and that wrongdoing be exposed. Sometimes that means bringing in outside professional investigators.

In the late 1970s, while I was Los Angeles County district attorney, a wave of highly publicized police shootings of private citizens by the Los Angeles Police Department and other police agencies had shaken public confidence in law enforcement.

My office was frustrated too. It was our responsibility to decide whether an officer had behaved criminally, but the information we received from police departments about officer-involved shootings was often tardy and incomplete. And because investigations of such shootings were carried out by other officers in the same department, there was a suspicion that they hadn’t been conducted with sufficient rigor.

The Eulia Love killing in early 1979 was the last straw. It involved two LAPD officers who had been called to a house in South Los Angeles after an angry woman threatened a gas company employee. When the officers arrived, Love threatened them with a kitchen knife she was holding. The officers opened fire and killed her.

Mistrust of police, particularly in poor neighborhoods, had reached a tipping point. In response, I initiated a rollout program, in which a deputy D.A. and a D.A.’s investigator went to the scene of every officer-involved shooting in the county as soon as we received word of it. We would then try to interview the witnesses who were there, run a full and independent investigation, and publicly issue investigative reports that included our conclusions about whether the shooting violated the law.

Predictably, there was some initial law enforcement opposition to the program.

Several police chiefs refused to cooperate, and in the beginning officers at the scene of a shooting sometimes made it nearly impossible to interview witnesses. In some instances our district attorney personnel would be kept out while witnesses were escorted out the back door. But eventually attitudes changed, and the rollout program became well accepted.

Why? Because in most cases our reports cleared officers of wrongdoing. In some cases, while clearing officers of criminal wrongdoing, our findings also pointed out training and strategy deficiencies. As a result of our investigations, departments made changes to training, something I believe led over time to fewer violent encounters between police officers and citizens. And because an incident had been investigated by an independent, outside agency, police departments couldn’t be accused of a coverup.

The reports coming out now from the county jails are disturbing in the same way those earlier allegations of police abuse were. There have been accounts of violence by deputies from outsiders, including two chaplains, a tutor and an ACLU monitor. In addition, more than 70 inmates have given statements alleging excessive force. These reports have all gone to the attorney general.

The sheriff should take these allegations seriously. Finding out the truth and shedding a bright light on the situation should be the first priority, and the process must include full, immediate cooperation with the Justice Department.

Whether or not the allegations prove to be accurate, there are steps that can be taken to protect both the department and the public. These could include placing cameras throughout the jails, providing better training to those who work in county facilities and developing a stronger relationship between the sheriff and outside monitors and non-department personnel such as chaplains. These outside witnesses could provide insight into the jails’ workings, and could be a good preventive force against both violence and unfounded allegations.

In the past, Baca has demonstrated a commitment to standing up for “the least among us.” He has appeared to be open-minded, and he has consistently indicated a desire to do the right thing. But action is necessary in addition to words.

The sheriff must make resolving this mess a top priority. His legacy, and the county’s confidence in his department, depend on it.

John Van de Kamp was district attorney of Los Angeles County from 1975 to 1981. He was California attorney general from 1983 to 1981.