D.A. Sends Police Assault Case to L.A. City Attorney : Misdemeanors: Heavy caseload forces shift in responsibility for handling such prosecutions for the first time in five years.

As part of a shift prompted by increasing official misconduct investigations, the Los Angeles city attorney has filed its first misdemeanor assault case against a police officer in at least five years.

The case was turned over to the city by the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office, which formerly handled such prosecutions but has started referring them to the city because of a steadily increasing caseload.

Although the charges against Van Nuys Division Patrol Officer Timothy Saurman, 37, mark no explicit policy change by the city attorney, the case and at least three others under review could open up a new front for prosecuting police at a time of heightened public distrust, the officials said.

“We are beginning to see what may be a new character of cases,” said Deputy City Atty. Maureen Siegel, chief of the office’s criminal section.

“In the wake of Rodney King and the Christopher Commission, there may be a heightened public and government awareness and we’re seeing the influence of more complaints and more cases and subsequently there could be a rise in the cases that are prosecuted,” Siegel said.

For years, the city attorney’s office refused to prosecute police misconduct cases to avoid possible conflicts of interest, especially in cases that could prompt civil suits against the city. Although Siegel said the policy was rescinded years ago, the district attorney’s office continued handling all police misconduct cases.

But in January, the district attorney’s office resumed referring potential misdemeanor cases against police to the city, largely because of a caseload that had doubled.

“We decided, ‘We’ve got a heavy caseload and why not send them over,’ ” spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said. “After the first one wasn’t rejected, we started sending others over.”

Some police watchdogs called the renewed involvement by the city attorney a double-edged sword that, while reinforcing a message that police misconduct won’t be tolerated, could also revive potential conflicts of interest.

Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California, lauded the city’s increased involvement in prosecuting police, but said there are pitfalls. “This poses a conflict of interest, no question,” she said.

Jerome Skolnick, a UC Berkeley professor of criminal law, agreed.

“These are people who have to work with the police,” Skolnick said in reference to city and district attorneys. “So what we may need is something like an independent prosecutor. . . . This may be an innovation we have to have in cities around the country.”

Siegel responded that the city attorney’s office could always remove itself from a particular case if necessary.

In the case filed Aug. 28 in Los Angeles Municipal Court, Saurman, an 11-year LAPD veteran, is charged with one count of assault with a deadly weapon, two counts of battery and one count of filing a false report. The charges stem from the Aug. 29, 1990, arrest of Patrick Malak of Burbank, who was stopped for suspected drug possession.

The case alleges that Saurman unnecessarily struck Malak with his baton, kicked him twice in the groin and hit him in the face, then lied to his supervisors about using any force and misrepresented what happened in a report. Administrative charges against him were already sustained by the Police Department, and Saurman has been on a six-month suspension without pay since July.

If convicted of the misdemeanor charges, Saurman faces a maximum three years in jail and $14,000 in fines. He is scheduled for arraignment Sept. 17.

Saurman and his attorneys could not be reached Thursday.

Even if Saurman is convicted, however, he is expected to return to work in January, said LAPD spokesman Cmdr. Robert Gil.

A misdemeanor conviction alone is not grounds for termination and officers cannot be disciplined twice for the same administrative charges, Gil said.