Los Angeles Ethics Panel

In response to “A Watchdog Can’t Be a Pussycat,” editorial, Sept. 9:

On Dec. 26 of last year, the day after Christmas, more than 20 investigators supervised by an attorney hired by the Ethics Commission secured and searched two floors of City Hall East occupied by my staff. Grand Jury subpoenas were served shortly thereafter on 17 city attorney employees. These events were widely publicized. The executive director of the Ethics Commission, Ben Bycel, intended and was prepared to seek indictments of at least two of my staff alleging that they were themselves or that they condoned and permitted “ghost employees” on the city payroll. Bycel demonstrated his lack of objectivity by acknowledging to a television audience that his own personal reputation was so at risk that if he proved unsuccessful he would be forced to return home to Santa Barbara. Only a judge’s order stopped Bycel from inflicting any greater harm on innocent persons who happen to work for me.

When Judge O’Brien enjoined the commission, the district attorney took over the matter and assigned it to his two top prosecutors, who had just convicted Charles Keating. After a seven-month investigation they concluded in a written report that there was no violation of law or even any evidence of a violation.

As city attorney of Los Angeles for the past seven years and as a deputy city attorney for four years before that, I have some experience in the duties of a public prosecutor. I also have some not inconsequential experience in investigating and prosecuting corruption claims against public officials. We in law enforcement must be mindful of the potential for misuse of the powers given us by the public. A prosecutor should be careful in the exercise of those powers because of the inherent potential for harm to innocent persons.

We should not infringe or intrude on the rights of anyone, including elected officials (“politicians”) and public employees (“government bureaucrats”), simply because of a notion that they deserve it or that all those in government service are inherently corrupt. In its editorial, The Times does itself and the public a major disservice when it encourages such cavalier behavior based on such cynical prejudices. I agree that a watchdog should not be a pussycat, but a watchdog that mistakenly bites the innocent mailman should not be petted, praised and told “good doggie.”

JAMES K. HAHN, Los Angeles City Attorney