City Can’t Get Clear Picture of Photographer’s Complaint : No-Name Plaintiff’s Case in Doubt

The city of Los Angeles moved Monday to dismiss a lawsuit by an unidentified journalist who claims that police forced him to destroy photos he had taken of a U.S. government agent at a public reception for Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.

At a hearing before U.S. District Judge Richard A. Gadbois, city officials said it is impossible to defend themselves against the suit without knowing the identity of the plaintiff, who has refused to disclose his name because he reportedly fears retribution from the government.

In a $10-million civil rights lawsuit, the man claimed a Los Angeles police officer who was providing security at a reception for Shamir at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in March threatened to arrest him. He claimed the officer demanded that he destroy his film or allow the LAPD to develop it and confiscate any photographs of the unidentified government agent.

Los Angeles police at first denied knowledge of the incident, but city officials on Monday acknowledged that Detective David Weller, who was assisting the Secret Service with security at the event, did seek to retrieve the film at the request of a federal agent.

The agent, city officials said, was apparently about to begin an “undercover operation” and feared that the photograph might be seen by the targets of the investigation.

No threats or coercion of any kind were used, and the journalist voluntarily destroyed his film, Assistant City Atty. Victoria Chaney said.

In court documents filed last week, the city said the federal agent, whom the plaintiffs believe to be a Secret Service agent, expressed fears for his safety in the event that his likeness was disseminated.

Weller offered to have the film developed at the LAPD’s expense and return all but the negative of the agent, but the journalist elected to destroy the film himself, the city said.

Attorney Stephen Yagman, who is representing the plaintiff, said the journalist exposed the film because he had been threatened with arrest and because he did not want police to view other photographs on the film.

Yagman said the plaintiff is working on a book about undercover operations, but he declined to give details.

At a hearing Monday on the city’s dismissal motion, Gadbois expressed doubt that he will permit the lawsuit to proceed without disclosure of the plaintiff’s identity.

“It is a matter of absurdity to talk about a case in which the plaintiff is not identified. I don’t see how they (the city) can possibly defend against a case like that.”