Can the Furhman Tapes Trigger Lasting Reform? : If all forces cooperate, the scandal can positively change the LAPD

Like it or not, now-retired Detective Mark Fuhrman has become a symbol of the Los Angeles Police Department. His tape-recorded racist remarks, description of police brutality and explanation of how to manufacture evidence have indicted all officers on the force, good or bad.

Clearly, the department requires reform to ferret out biased cops who break rules and laws. But how are police leaders to overcome daunting obstacles such as the unwritten code of silence that deters whistle-blowers, the protections afforded by the City Charter, state laws and the police union and the prevailing “me-against-them” culture among officers?

Mayor Richard Riordan, Police Chief Willie L. Williams, the city Police Commission and members of the City Council insist that no racial bias, sexual harassment or police brutality will be tolerated in the department. But if Fuhrman’s comments are to be believed, those guidelines often have been skirted.

Amid the embarrassment growing out of disclosure of the Fuhrman tapes, the mayor and chief want to change the lines of authority in the LAPD, similar to the way in which the LEARN program has decentralized authority in the Los Angeles school district, diverting it from headquarters to principals on campus. This approach sounds promising, but few previous promises of LAPD reform made have been successfully delivered.

The proposed decentralization plan would give more clout to supervisors at the division and station level, though the ultimate authority would remain with the chief. This makes sense, at least in theory, because the sergeants, lieutenants and captains in the field come into closest contact with rank-and-file officers, and with the public. They ought to know who is and who isn’t doing his or her job. But knowing is one thing and telling is another.

Perhaps some progress can be achieved if commanding officers are forced to become watchdogs and their careers suddenly depend on the behavior of officers under them. If captains know about wrongdoing and they do nothing, they must share in the liability. But as long as the pervasive code of silence reigns, few officers will report the misconduct of others. Those who do break the code should be rewarded by the department; now they face only punishment from their peers.

Even when wrongdoing is alleged, police officers are shielded by Civil Service protections in the City Charter, by state laws and by a strong, often obstructionist police union. Accused officers should get due process, but the chief, whether it is Williams or someone else, needs the authority to act quickly and decisively to fire bad cops. And the district attorney, whether Gil Garcetti or someone else, must prosecute vigorously in cases of criminal behavior.

Few improvements can happen without union cooperation, and that has been a problem. Perhaps leaders of the Los Angeles Police Protective League are seeing the light in the wake of the Fuhrman scandal. In ads taken out this week in the Los Angeles Sentinel, a black-owned weekly, and La Opinion, a Spanish-language daily, the police union says it has been “betrayed” by the racist actions and other violations described by the retired detective. That’s significant, but if the league really wants to mend fences in minority communities, it should make peace with the black officers association, which recently filed a discrimination suit against the union. That is not too much to ask in this crisis.

The LAPD has made progress in recruitment and training. But how much really has changed since the resignation of Chief Daryl F. Gates and the arrival of a new chief, a new mayor, a new Police Commission membership and several new members on the City Council? How much really was learned from the world-notorious beating of Rodney G. King and the subsequent federal civil rights convictions of LAPD officers?

Is the Christopher Commission report, which in 1991 called for broad reform, simply gathering dust? Thirty-four of the 44 problem officers identified by the Christopher Commission remain in the LAPD. Earlier this week Williams indicated that the police brass was monitoring 100 problem officers in addition to the 34; on Thursday he said there was no list but rather “a continuous review from time to time” in which a changing number of officers were scrutinized. However the monitoring process, now is the time for the chief to come down hard on corrupt officers in order to regain public trust in the Police Department.