Mild Report on Sheriff's Dept. Challenged : Law enforcement: Block's staff document finds fewer deficiencies than in LAPD. Critics question the review's timing and substance.

By VICTOR MERINA, RICHARD SIMON and JESSE KATZ

Sept. 12, 1991 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITERS

An in-house review has found fewer deficiencies in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s operations than the Christopher Commission uncovered in its investigation of racism and brutality by Los Angeles police.

But that favorable picture was challenged Wednesday by critics who claimed that the timing and substance of Sheriff Sherman Block’s staff report was intended to head off an independent investigation of his department.

One attorney said the department fails to address what he contends is the misuse of dogs in apprehending suspects. And a lawyer representing a fired gay deputy disputed the report’s conclusion that the department does not discriminate against gays.

The Times found indications that, like LAPD officers, some sheriff’s deputies have made racist and sexist remarks in computer messages.

The department in its report said there have been only “some minor problems” with computerized messages and “no evidence” of racist and sexist messages. A Times review of 4,500 randomly selected messages this year found examples of deputies calling someone “buckwheat,” mimicking the speech of racial minorities and joking about the use of force.

The report, prepared by Block’s staff and unveiled Tuesday, said the agency agreed with most of the 100 recommendations of the Christopher Commission--a panel formed to review the LAPD following the police beating of motorist Rodney G. King.

The 70-page document acknowledged that some sheriff’s “policies, procedures or performance standards are deficient and can be enhanced.” But for the most part, the report concluded that the department already has implemented changes to deal with major problems, including excessive force, or is moving to strengthen its policies against deputy misconduct.

“I believe that we have done and are doing a good job. It is obvious from the tone of the report that we could do a better job,” Block said in an interview Wednesday, one day after he announced the formation of a 21-member citizens advisory panel to implement Christopher Commission-like reforms.

“I think the fact that the report was done says volumes about the department and that is that we are always striving to improve our operation,” Block said.

But Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California, said that Block is “trying to avert a top to bottom investigation” of his department. “I really don’t believe the Sheriff’s Department can evaluate itself,” she said.

Ripston said she has not read the full report but added: “The Sheriff’s Department saying ‘We’re doing just as the Christopher Commission says,’ looks good on paper, but the real question is what is happening out on the street. And too often there is a very big gap between what the rule is and what is happening.”

Other critics testified at a hearing Tuesday before the County Board of Supervisors that citizens are seeing out-of-control deputies who are responsible for a rash of beatings and shooting deaths. They allege that recent events underscore the need for an independent investigation of the 8,000-member department, which provides law enforcement to 2.5 million residents in 42 cities and unincorporated territory.

However, the sheriff’s report said monitoring of use of force by deputies has improved. The department said it is developing a computer system to track disciplinary investigations and has proposed a policy requiring deputies “observing the use of force” to report it.

Another policy calls for an immediate Internal Affairs investigation whenever someone arrested by deputies is hospitalized.

In addition, the report said the department has an “established and formalized bite investigation process for every K-9 bite incident”--and every incident is thoroughly investigated.

But attorney Barry Litt, whose clients include people allegedly bitten by sheriff’s dogs, disputed the caliber of the investigations and said the Sheriff’s Department use of dogs was worse than the LAPD.

“Their response does not address the fundamental issue, which is their policy to have dogs attack in situations where there is no justification for the use of force,” he said.

In response, Block said that of 134 suspects apprehended by dogs during the first six months of this year, 34 were bitten, and that “says to me the dogs are not just sent in indiscriminately.”

John Duran, an attorney who has filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against the Sheriff’s Department on behalf of a gay former deputy Bruce Boland, disputed the report’s claims that sexual orientation is not a factor in employment in the department.

Duran said, “If that’s true, if it (sexual orientation) is not a factor (as sheriff’s officials claim), why is there no evidence of any gays or lesbians on the force . . .?”

Block replied: “I’m telling you that sexual orientation is not a factor.”

The department said there was no evidence that sheriff’s deputies had used their patrol car computers to send racist or sexually offensive messages similar to the LAPD messages disclosed by the Christopher Commission.

In their findings, the Christopher panel members published more than 700 such computer messages sent by LAPD officers that were felt to be denigrating to minorities, women and others.

Referring to spot checks of computer messages, the Sheriff’s Department said: “To date, while there have been some minor problems involving inappropriate language and unprofessional comments, there have been no evidence of messages of the nature which attracted the attention of the Christopher Commission.”

The Times review of 4,500 messages during a three-month period this year found several dozen examples of gang-style lingo, sexually suggestive remarks and imitations of the speech style of some minorities.

“Hey buckwheat, you freezin up there?” one message asked.

Another message referred to “The tribal nation of La Puente”--a community that is heavily Latino.

“Affirm homeboy,” said one message. “Where is u?” asked another.

Apparent references to force were also involved in messages: “Did you slam dunk the guy like a jelly donut?” said one. “My finger is starting to itch,” said another.

Asked about the messages, Block said, “I’m not implying that there has never been a racist or sexist message, and in fact, people have been disciplined, everything from reprimand to discharge, for misuse of the system.

“We’re talking up to 30,000 transmissions daily. A single transmission that is wholly inappropriate . . . is a serious issue, but when we say minor we’re talking in contrast to volume.”

Deputy Bill Wehner, a department spokesman, said that two deputies have been fired for sending inappropriate messages, but he declined to identify them or the contents of the messages. He said he did not think the messages were particularly offensive, but the officers persisted in improper use of the message system.

Warren Christopher, who chaired the LAPD oversight commission, said he has not read the sheriff’s report and could not comment on any of the specific recommendations.

“We’re very pleased if our report has been useful to the sheriff’s office,” he said, “and we’re pleased that he has looked to see if our report is applicable.”

Meanwhile, members of Block’s newly named citizen’s advisory panel say they don’t plan to limit their inquiry to recommendations in the Christopher report.

“I don’t plan to be a rubber stamp (for the sheriff),” said Leticia Quezada, a Los Angeles school board member.

Block said the 21-member panel is free to look at any department records and interview any personnel before advising him on reforms.

Computer Messages

A Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department report this week said that there have been only “some minor problems” with computerized messages, but not the pattern of improper racial remarks attributed to Los Angeles police officers in the Christopher Commission report.

A Times review of nearly 4,500 Sheriff’s Department messages found examples of gang lingo and racial mimicry, as well as remarks about women, racial minorities and violence. The identity and race of those sending the messages was unknown .

Here are some examples, containing the spelling and grammar used in the messages:

* “Where u b . . . and wat up.”

* “Whats up bro.”

* “Affirm homeboy.”

* “Where is u.”

* “Yo, it b me.”

* “Why dont chew try.”

* “Hey buckwheat, you freezin up there.”

* “Me dont know nothing.”

* “If u want, aint no thang.”

* “U be welcome.”

* “The tribal nation of La Puente.”