Deputy Asked Him to Lie, Witness Testifies : Suit: A businessman says in a deposition that the officer requested him to go along with the official version of a dog-bite incident but that he refused to change his story.

A Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy paid a personal visit to a witness in a K-9 biting case in an effort to persuade the businessman to go along with the official report on the incident, according to sworn testimony in the matter.

Lawndale businessman James Stadler says in a deposition that he refused to alter his own account. He said he told the deputy, canine handler Ernest Burwell, that “I would prefer to tell the truth” about the 1989 incident, in which a burglar was severely bitten by a Sheriff’s Department dog on the premises of Stadler’s moving and storage company.

The convicted burglar, Michael H. Mellen, is suing the department, alleging that the dog was allowed to bite him severely several times after he had been handcuffed.

The dispute between the canine handler and the businessman who had summoned deputies to look for the burglar is the latest episode in a running legal fight over the use of police dogs. Critics say that canine handlers often encourage the dogs to bite unnecessarily, while the Sheriff’s Department maintains that the canines are used properly to catch dangerous criminals.

Sheriff Sherman Block and department attorney Eugene Ramirez note that in six recent suits brought against deputies for alleged improper handling of the dogs, there have been five acquittals and one hung jury.

But Donald Cook and Robert Mann, attorneys for a number of plaintiffs in these cases, respond that the sheriff’s overall canine policy was not allowed to be examined in the Superior Court actions. They said, however, that the policy will be the subject of a separate federal court case this fall that may produce a more definitive judgment.

In Mellen’s case, the deputy’s report said that the dog saw the burglar and bit him before deputies could intervene. Stadler contradicted that in his May 28 deposition in Mellen’s Superior Court suit, saying that he and the deputies saw Mellen before the dog did.

Stadler testified that he did not see the bite because he left at the request of deputies. However, he said he later heard screams from the burglar and saw blood on the floor.

The visit from Burwell came nearly two years later, in 1991, Stadler testified. He said Burwell appeared at his office and told him that unless he went along precisely with the deputy’s account of the incident Burwell “could lose his job.”

Stadler said he told the deputy: “If I tell the truth, I remember the truth. I don’t remember lies very well.”

Burwell did not respond to a call seeking comment.

But the Sheriff’s Department’s attorney, Ramirez, said that aside from Stadler’s testimony “there’s no indication that this conversation (between Stadler and Burwell) ever occurred.”

Noting that Stadler had not seen the actual bite, Ramirez said, “It would be wiser to wait until we get before a jury to ascertain the absolute facts.”

Stadler, meanwhile, said his wife and friends have told him he would have been wiser to go along with the deputy’s request for support.

He does not like the fact that he has been subpoenaed to appear as a plaintiff’s witness in several other K-9 lawsuits filed against law enforcement officials.

But, Stadler said in an interview, he remains determined. “I will not tell a lie for anybody. . . . The issue is I can’t lie under oath.”

Attorney Cook said he believes the Stadler deposition indicates that other Sheriff’s Department reports may be unreliable.

A department spokesman, citing the pending litigation, declined to say whether Burwell had been investigated or disciplined.