Officers Urged to Hold Back on the Streets : Law enforcement: Police are advised by an official of their union to be less aggressive to protect their careers in the aftermath of the Rodney King affair.

An official of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, saying officers are being harshly disciplined in the wake of “uncontrollable police bashing” stemming from the Rodney King affair, is advising rank-and-file officers to be less aggressive on the streets to protect their careers.

Writing in the June issue of the league’s Blue Line newspaper, Cliff Ruff, the league’s director of legal affairs, blamed the news media and the LAPD’s top brass for creating an atmosphere in which unsubstantiated complaints of police brutality now receive higher-than-average attention.

“The result of this media bashing has been a typical overreaction by the department of taking a personnel complaint on every minute thing possible,” Ruff wrote. “We are already seeing stiffer penalties offered and increased recommendations for Board of Rights (disciplinary hearings).”

He said that with “all the paper being generated” by complaints, police supervisors are not giving officers in the field the leadership and guidance they need. “The supervisor will just be perceived as being there to burn officers,” he wrote.

Ruff then gave the rank-and-file this advice: “A word to the wise, PR the public, study, be nice to your supervisors, promote (to another job) and get off the streets. Until we get a new mayor and brass who support the officers who put criminals in jail, you should not jeopardize your family’s future. . . . Look out!”

While acknowledging that the column was not the official position of the union that represents Los Angeles’ 8,300 police officers, Ruff said Tuesday he wrote it because it was an accurate reflection of the heightened scrutiny officers face in the wake of the King incident.

“A guy who doesn’t do anything (on the streets) doesn’t get challenged,” he said. “People seem to think these days that where there is smoke, there’s fire. But there’s no evidence that’s true all the time.”

As news of the column spread, negative reaction to it Tuesday was swift, both inside and outside the Police Department.

“Officers might listen to what he’s saying and understand, knowing where he’s coming from,” said Hollenbeck Division Detective Rick Barrera. “But the bottom line is, I’m still going to perform a job. I’ve yet to see any cop say, ‘I’m not going to do any more police work.’ Guys out there want to be good police officers.”

Sgt. Emilio Perez, president of a Latino police officers group, added:

“The Rodney King incident gives us a chance to show the press and the community that we can work together and that we can open ourselves up for scrutiny. A good police officer enjoys police work and doesn’t mind if the press comes around to see what you’re doing.”

Los Angeles City Councilman Richard Alatorre, who chairs the council’s Police, Fire and Public Safety Committee, called the column an “unfortunate piece of advice.”

“The idea of being aggressive and doing their job is what they’re paid to do,” Alatorre said.

Police Department spokesman Cmdr. Robert Gil declined comment on the column.

In his column, Ruff also told officers that the league was concerned to learn that the Police Department had turned over the names, home addresses and home telephone numbers of all Foothill Division officers to the FBI and later to the Christopher Commission, the citizens panel investigating the LAPD.

He explained Tuesday that commission staffers and others, whom he called “questionable legal and non-legal personnel outside the control of the department,” had no right to the data.

“There is absolutely no need or data to be gleaned from an officer’s residence address and home telephone number,” Ruff wrote. “This personal area of confidentiality is most sensitive to the privacy and safety of police officers.”

He noted that news organizations have petitioned the courts to review the data, leading to a wider unwarranted distribution.

Then, directing his comments at Chief Daryl F. Gates, Ruff wrote: “Come on, chief, isn’t loyalty a two-way street? Why did you want to release officers’ home addresses and phone numbers and violate the sanctity of the officers’ home lives? We love and support you, chief, but give us some support back and protect your family members’ addresses from the leftists.”