Who’ll Gain From Informant’s Actions? : Criminal justice: Some legal experts say the prosecution’s Operation Roundup cases could be undermined by felon’s alleged misdeeds.

Detectives knew they were dealing with a career crook when they enlisted Henry Gomez to help bust open one of Orange County’s most treacherous gangs.

The police put Gomez on their payroll, gave him a beat-up Buick Riviera and sent him out to the streets of Santa Ana to buy drugs in what was to become the city’s largest gang sweep ever. Along the way, authorities say, Gomez stole from police and lied about it and helped misidentify six people who were later exonerated.

Now, the convicted felon’s alleged misdeeds are providing fodder for defense attorneys trying to fight the Operation Roundup indictments and have raised questions about the use of informants in the street war against drugs.

Defense attorneys and some legal experts contend the cases are undermined by Gomez’s credibility and the fact that FBI documents indicate that part of his compensation was linked to his performance.

“This guy’s as dirty as you can get,” said Deputy Public Defender Brian Ducker.

But to the FBI, police and prosecutors, the unscrupulous tendencies of informants such as Gomez are a small price to pay for the risks they take to assist undercover investigations.

Despite problems with Gomez, one source close to the investigation said, $21,000 and title to an 11-year-old car that often wouldn’t start is a scant price to pay for what Gomez did--put his life on the line each of he 209 times he forayed into gang territory.

“He could have been killed any one of those times. Would you do that for $21,000?” said the source, who spoke on the condition that his name be withheld.

Authorities say they believe they can successfully prosecute the more than 100 Operation Roundup cases, which are under review in light of the misidentifications.

“A good prosecutor can explain to a jury that, ‘Hey, you can’t reach into the gutter and pull up a swan,’ ” said Deputy District Atty. Carl Armbrust, head of the narcotics enforcement team.

“As it relates to Henry, we were disappointed when we found out he was stealing, and we shut the program down when we found that out, but I don’t think it’s going to affect the credibility of the case. Henry freely admits that he steals money. It takes a thief to catch a thief.

“I observed him on the witness stand, and I thought he was an excellent witness. He comes off very sincere. The grand jury loved him.”

This week, the first of the Operation Roundup cases is set for trial, and Gomez may take the witness stand to talk about his exploits.

Henry Lawrence Gomez Jr., 38, has a rap sheet dating back to the 1970s that includes battery, assault, kidnaping, forged prescriptions, residential burglary, embezzlement, vehicle theft and possession of hypodermic syringes.

Last week, authorities said they dismissed cases against six people in part because Gomez helped finger the wrong suspects when he sat down with police to figure out who sold drugs to him.

To keep Gomez honest and gather evidence, investigators had videotaped and tape recorded each drug deal.

Investigators would take Gomez to a safehouse and search him before he hit the streets. A video camera hidden in the door of his Buick Riviera ran from the time he left, and Gomez was instructed to return to the house before the two-hour tape ran out, Ducker said.

But Gomez managed to pilfer at least $115 from police during drug deals between January and March, stuffing bills through the torn lining of his jacket pocket and jamming them deep into a sock, according to investigative reports.

Sometimes, the reports show, he covered the camera with his arm when he gave dealers money, or lied out loud on tape about drug prices to cover up his thefts.

When police caught him stealing in March, he lied about it at first and later confessed, returning the money, authorities said. Santa Ana police officers and FBI agents then devised a scheme to block further thefts, taking away Gomez’s jacket and stepping up searches.

When prosecutors found out about the thefts in late May, concerns about Gomez’s reliability prompted all three agencies to halt the operation.

“We stopped it because we don’t think we should be using people who are lying to us and stealing from us as informants,” Armbrust said. “But now that it’s over, I don’t think it’s going to affect the case, because the jury is going to be sitting there looking at the videotape. Henry might have lied, but the video doesn’t lie.”

Authorities have declined to reveal Gomez’s whereabouts.

Ducker, who is overseeing his office’s handling of many of the Operation Roundup defendants, said the fact that Gomez still managed to deceive his handlers despite monitoring efforts will work in the defense’s favor.

Gomez’s thefts can be used to throw the videotapes into question, he said.

“He is obviously defrauding the camera, purposely. So if that’s true, first of all, was there a buy? Did he give the guy any money? We’re really talking about sophisticated deception, and sophisticated deception doesn’t sound to me like credible,” Ducker said.

According to an FBI memo, Gomez was paid based on “performance/hours worked” and a “discretionary bonus payment” promised after the operation concluded.

Legal experts say the arrangement can help the defense show Gomez had good reason to lie. “That’s very offensive. Talk about a motive there,” said attorney James Riddet.

Just last month, a published U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision said such payment schemes create “too great an incentive to fabricate evidence and distort the truth.”

James N. Donckels, a veteran FBI man who runs the bureau’s Orange County office and supervised agents involved in Operation Roundup, declined to talk about Gomez. But Donckels spoke in general terms about his office’s use of informants.

“They are extremely crucial to us in many investigations,” he said. “I’m not saying that without cooperative witnesses we can never solve a crime, but in a lot of cases they can be very critical. Who is the best person in a position to give you information about a very dangerous felon? Another dangerous felon.”

He said the FBI does not normally tie monetary return or payments to the type of “bounty” described in the 9th Circuit ruling. “ ‘Performance’ can mean, ‘How much work did he do. How much time did he invest?’ Is that a bounty?” he said.

In his 26 years with the FBI, Donckels said, he has never seen a jury base a verdict strictly on information supplied by an informant, but rather by the evidence that corroborates what the informant said or did.

“Jurors have a tremendous ability to cut through the smoke and find the fire,” he said.

Defense attorneys and legal experts say that what Gomez was doing when he was not on camera also is crucial.

“What happened the night before? What happened the day before? What was this informant doing and saying to make these deals go down? Nothing? Or something?” said David Biggs, an associate professor at Western State University College of Law. “Now that we know he’s a thief, who’s to say that he’s not a liar?”

Gomez did more than just buy drugs. He was sent out to build a rapport with members of the Sixth Street gang who have had a stranglehold on Santa Ana’s 3rd Street neighborhood for years. He hung out in “party rooms” as gang members smoked heroin, and checked out guns and Rolex watches they had for sale, according to FBI reports.

Investigators spotted Gomez with a gang member known as “Shorty” in the neighborhood on Aug. 1, long after he was called off the streets, an FBI report shows. According to the report, Gomez told an agent he had not engaged in illegal activities.

But defense attorneys challenge those assertions.

“I know there are many situations when the defendants say (Gomez) was smoking dope with them. That was alleged by two or three clients that I’m aware of, and also that they saw him shoot up (inject drugs),” Ducker said. Another defendant alleged Gomez set up him, providing the drugs that the defendant was later arrested with.

Some legal experts said they think that jurors on Operation Roundup cases may be able to look past Gomez and focus on the larger picture of gang crime in a troubled neighborhood.

“It comes down to how much the jury is willing to swallow to accomplish the goal,” Biggs said. “When you’ve got a war on drugs, you’ve got a lot of citizens who are willing to look the other way considerably.”

“If you look at the bigger picture, crime in that area has gone down,” said Gregory Chris Brown, associate professor of criminal justice at Chapman University. “They are instituting programs to keep the community in better standing. I think overall it has had a positive impact on the community and the ends will justify the means.

“Plus, the general public has a very short memory. They would much rather have law enforcement make a few minor mistakes, and they think of them as minor, than to allow a criminal entity like this to fester in their community.”