Hurt Tagger Was Treated as Suspect, Not Victim, Lawyer Says : Crime: Police deny accusations that investigation of Jan. 31 shooting favored the gunman. They cite conflicting stories given by the youth.

Even though he had been shot and his best friend was gunned down before his eyes, accused tagger David Hillo was treated by police more like a suspect than a victim, Hillo’s lawyer said Tuesday.

“The homicide detectives slanted this investigation against the kids,” attorney Luis Carrillo told reporters after a Municipal Court judge postponed an arraignment in Hillo’s misdemeanor vandalism case until next week.

Police and prosecutors denied that anyone had received special treatment during their investigation of a case characterized by quickly changing and contradictory accounts of what happened. In fact, one Los Angeles police detective said no one in his office approved of the way that Hillo and his companion had been confronted and shot by a man some view as a racist vigilante.

It was just another day of spin control in a case that has made headlines internationally and blended the political hot potatoes of race, gun control, crime, selective prosecution and street justice locally.

This much is clear: Hillo and another tagger, Cesar Rene Arce, were shot by William Andrew Masters II on Jan. 31. The deadly confrontation began when Masters, who was out for a walk, came upon the two spray-painting an overpass of the Hollywood Freeway in Sun Valley.

Arce was killed and Hillo, who was shot in the buttocks, was charged with vandalism and violating his probation on an earlier tagging incident. Masters has been charged with carrying a loaded and concealed weapon and faces arraignment in Municipal Court on Thursday.

The case took on racial overtones after Masters referred to the taggers as “skinhead Mexicans.” The district attorney’s office declined to file felony charges, ruling that Masters reasonably felt threatened when Hillo brandished a screwdriver.

Police and prosecutors on Tuesday denied the allegation that they had favored Masters, as both sides quoted selectively from initial police reports that have yet to be made public.

They added that Hillo offered several conflicting versions of what happened. Initially, they said, Hillo denied being present, saying he’d been shot in a drive-by. Later, he said he’d been tagging at another location. He denied having the screwdriver, then admitted having it in his pocket but denied brandishing it.

Yet, lead investigators on the case acknowledged Tuesday that police deceived Hillo during six hours of questioning at a Valley hospital as he recovered from his gunshot wound. The officers falsely told him that a private security guard had witnessed the shooting, police said.

“There’s no rule that says that everything we say during our interrogation has to be accurate,” said Lt. Ron LaRue, head of North Hollywood detectives.

Homicide Detective Mike Coffey also admitted Tuesday that investigators “might have raised their voices” during their interview with Hillo. “It might have gotten him to be more truthful with us,” Coffey said.

*

In addition, Coffey said an autopsy report indicates that Arce was shot in the “rear side,” although the coroner’s office had originally stated he was shot in the chest.

Hillo’s attorneys, who unsuccessfully pressed prosecutors to file felony charges against Masters, contend that when the full story emerges Hillo will be seen as the victim of both a racist vigilante and a criminal justice system that devalues the lives of Latinos.

“Here’s a perfect example. A white man got away with murder,” Carrillo said.

Carrillo said he was trying to work out a deal with prosecutors to spare the 20-year-old Hillo from jail. “He is suffering enough,” the attorney said. “He was shot in the back and he was traumatized by the murder of his best friend.”

Pointing to excerpts of police reports in the case, Carrillo said investigators grilled Hillo, while offering admitted shooter William Masters, 35, deferential treatment.

Even though Hillo had been shot and was “sobbing hysterically,” at first, investigators “badgered” him during interrogation--making statements like “You’re a big . . . guy, David”--until Hillo agreed with them that Masters might have felt intimidated, Carrillo said.

On the other hand, police were far more deferential to Masters, Carrillo contends, speaking with him “like a bunch of guys who were sitting around talking about baseball.”

Furthermore, he added, the investigators ignored Masters’ first, spontaneous statement, “I shot him because he was spray painting.”

Masters was put in a patrol car, giving him an opportunity to fabricate a story about the taggers brandishing a screwdriver and asking for his wallet, Carrillo said.

Masters told police that he was afraid Hillo and Arce would rob him, a story that ultimately led prosecutors to conclude the shooting of 18-year-old Arce was justified.

But Coffey said police had no agenda when they arrived at the crime scene.

“We had two people shot, but we had no idea what transpired. We had to keep an open mind of what was going on,” Coffey said.

*

In fact, Coffey said, he did not approve of Masters or what he had done.

“I still don’t like this case,” Coffey said. “I don’t like this Masters. I’m not on his side. No one liked the way Masters handled this situation. No one approved, at least in my office, of the way Masters confronted these two.”

He also said he remains troubled about the case because it pivots on a fact that could be verified only by the dead Arce: whether Hillo actually threatened Masters.

“They can say things about each other until doomsday,” Coffey said of Hillo and Masters. “And we’ll never know.”