Aftermath of Kolts: The Sound of Silence : Sheriff: Block still hasn’t responded on reforms for his errant deputies. Why aren’t the supervisors supervising?

We should not have to stretch our imagination very far to realize what happens when law enforcement and political leaders stick their heads in the sand when it comes to police brutality and the misadministration of justice. Burned-down buildings are vivid reminders.

So why, then, the utter silence when it comes to the report of retired Judge James G. Kolts--a report far more comprehensive in scope and damaging in findings than the Christopher Commission report?

The Kolts Report--an inquiry costing more than $400,000, initiated after community outrage over use of lethal force in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department--found “deeply disturbing evidence of excessive force and lax discipline” within the Sheriff’s Department, not to mention an even greater number of “problem” officers than the Christopher Commission found in the LAPD.

In one of many photo opportunities, Sheriff Sherman Block appeared before the press just after the Kolts Report’s release July 20. Block, an astute politician, claimed he would issue an official response before the end of September. September has come and gone, and as we move through October, the silence from Block and the Board of Supervisors is deeply disturbing.

Block has yet to tell us what he has done regarding the wave of excessive force and lax discipline that gave rise to the demand for such an investigation in the first place. What about the 62 rogue deputies responsible for nearly 500 use-of-force and harassment incidents?

And while it is one thing to mismanage the Sheriff’s Department, it is quite another to adopt the “look the other way and er to adopt the “look the other way and pretend it doesn’t exist” mentality displayed by the five supervisors. Year after year, they apparently have preferred to quietly dole out millions to settle excessive-force lawsuits rather than to deal with the root of the problem.

Confronted with the harsh realities of fiscal constraints and recent painful budget cutback decisions, one would think the supervisors would be in the forefront in adjudication of civilian complaints of brutality and harassment, as recommended by Kolts. It would seem that they would have promptly urged monitoring deputies that use unnecessary force and starting “community-based” policing, which set into motion the greatest police reform movement in Los Angeles after the Christopher Commission report.

Is it that the supervisors feel no empathy for the victims of police misconduct? Or is it that they so fear the police lobby that they can’t insist on good law enforcement? Do they fear that insisting that Block clean up his not-so-little house of bad cops may cost them the sheriff’s “law-and-order” endorsement when they seek reelection?

After the overwhelming vote of 65% to 35% on Charter Amendment F, the city’s police reform measure, and the 70% to 30% vote in San Diego County--hardly a hotbed of radicalism--to establish a civilian review board over the sheriff there, do the Los Angeles supervisors really believe that only “radicals” care about a civilian review process to clean up the Sheriff’s Department?

Whatever the case, the silence cannot endure. The purpose of spending half a million dollars on a special counsel was to find out if there was a serious problem, and if so, to fix it. Kolts did, so let’s get on with it.