Special Prosecutor Urged for Police Abuse

Wrapping up a long-running investigation into misconduct and bias among Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies and Los Angeles Police Department officers, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights will recommend that a special prosecutor be created to replace the county district attorney in pursuing allegations of abuse against law enforcement officers.

In its report on a probe that has been ongoing since 1993, the commission cites the district attorney’s poor record of prosecuting such cases and consequent lack of public faith in the process as justification for the new post.

The commissioners also are calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct its own investigation into allegations that sheriff’s deputies have formed “gangs” within the rank and file to mete out their own brand of street justice.

“Serious allegations persist that groups of deputies have formed associations that harass and brutalize minority residents,” commissioners wrote in the report, which is scheduled for release next month but was obtained in advance by The Times.

“The [Sheriff’s Department] should take steps . . . to disband such groups permanently,” the report said. In addition, the eight-member commission recommends that the county appoint a civilian review board to investigate misconduct complaints against the Sheriff’s Department.

The LAPD, meanwhile, is taken to task for failing to adequately address a number of problems, including excessive use of force, gender bias and the so-called code of silence within its ranks.

Law enforcement officials, particularly at the LAPD, criticized the report, saying many of its findings were inaccurate and, in some cases, outdated. Three members of the civil rights commission also expressed reservations, saying the report was substandard.

According to the report, both departments need to make greater strides in community policing programs and improve their relationships with minority communities.

“Despite admirable training programs in both departments, there is evidence of increasing intolerance of ethnic and minority immigrants among some members of both the LAPD and the [Sheriff’s Department],” the report said.

In fact, the report said, “There is evidence that a significant number of rank-and-file [sheriff’s] deputies have been resistant to cultural awareness instruction.”

The commissioners’ most controversial recommendation concerned prosecution of misconduct cases: “The district attorney’s reliance on police cooperation for prosecuting crimes conflicts with its duty to prosecute police misconduct,” the report said. “There is low public confidence in the D.A.’s office as a tool for controlling misconduct by [Sheriff’s Department] officials.”

In 1996 and 1997, the Sheriff’s Department referred 126 cases to the Special Investigations Division of the district attorney’s office. Criminal charges were filed against 11 deputies.

“Because of its relationship with the Sheriff’s Department, combined with the small number of police prosecutions, claims by the D.A. that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute a given case are met with skepticism,” said the report, which did not provide comparable statistics for the LAPD.

Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office, said the office would not comment on the report until it has a chance to review it.

But she said that Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti had sent a letter to the commission in 1998, in which he said he is “strongly committed to the prosecution of all the residents of this county regardless of whether the criminal offenders are law enforcement officials or private citizens.”

The findings of the commissioners--who are appointed by the president and members of Congress--are based, in part, on hearings conducted in Los Angeles in 1996, as well as on subsequent interviews and media reports. Although the report is being billed as a thorough investigation into policing in Los Angeles, several commission members said the document is inadequate.

In a dissenting statement at the end of the 233-page document, Commissioners Carl A. Anderson, Robert P. George and Russell G. Redenbaugh, all appointed during George Bush’s presidency, said the document fails to adequately deal with the broader issues of poverty, inequality and discrimination. They also took issue with the fact that the report relies heavily on media sources.

“The report . . . does not meet the commission’s high standards for fact finding and advising the Congress and the American people on critical civil rights developments in this country,” the three commissioners wrote.

Moreover, the dissenters said, several recommendations in the report, such as the call for an independent prosecutor and a civilian review board, “are an overreaction which, in the long run, would actually thwart the kinds of results the commission wants to see.”

LAPD’s Reaction

LAPD officials who have reviewed an advance copy of the report said they also are troubled by some of the findings and recommendations. They faulted the commission’s research and the quality of witness testimony. They also contended that the report makes sweeping, inaccurate generalizations about the department.

“We have some grave concerns about the substance of the report,” said LAPD Cmdr. David J. Kalish, a department spokesman. He said the LAPD plans to send the commission a detailed letter addressing its concerns.

Sheriff’s Department officials, meanwhile, declined to comment, saying that they have not yet had a chance to review the document.

Commission members and their public affairs officials could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

The Civil Rights Commission began its investigation into the LAPD and the Sheriff’s Department in 1993, as part of a nationwide project on racial and ethnic tensions. Its findings and recommendations are forwarded to the president and Congress, as well as local officials.

The commission decided to conduct a follow-up report on policing in Los Angeles in 1996, after the testimony of LAPD Det. Mark Fuhrman during the O.J. Simpson murder trial and the videotaped beating of two suspected undocumented immigrants by Riverside County sheriff’s deputies.

“The commission’s report finds that Los Angeles has received more immigrants than any other city in the United States during the past several decades,” Commission Chairwoman Mary Frances Berry wrote. “As a result, Los Angeles has become a city of immigrants: Roughly one in 10 Los Angeles County residents immigrated to the United States after 1985 and roughly 17% arrived after 1980.”

For the LAPD, the commission’s report is a mixed review, crediting the department with making strides in certain areas but criticizing it for falling short on many issues.

Commissioners said the LAPD should be commended for improving its diversity, noting that it leads the state in the percentages of women and minorities on the force. And the commission praised the LAPD for its “training efforts with respect to racial and gender bias.”

Nonetheless, the commissioners found that the LAPD--18% of whose officers now are women--lags far behind its goal of having a police force that is 40% female. More troubling, the commissioners concluded, gender bias “continues to be a significant problem” within the LAPD.

The commissioners found that tensions between the LAPD and minority communities are exacerbated by “perceptions and incidents of the department’s application of excessive force towards [sic] people of color.”

For example, the commissioners cited a study showing that pepper spray is more frequently used by LAPD officers on African Americans and Latinos than on whites.

Community Policing

Commissioners found that the “code of silence” practice of officers refusing to report or lying about a colleague’s misconduct remains a “barrier to eradicating excessive force and discriminatory treatment in the LAPD.”

To improve relationships with minority communities and other residents, the commissioners said the LAPD needs to make greater progress in institutionalizing community policing programs. The department also should “investigate training programs that offer conflict resolution and mediation” as a way of “defusing some situations that could potentially escalate into violence.”

The commissioners recommended that the LAPD randomly test officers on their “subduing techniques” to ensure that they comply with the department’s use of force policies. And, the commissioners said, additional efforts need to be taken to make officers “more knowledgeable about diverse cultures, in order to improve relationships with immigrant communities.”

Many of the recommendations in the commission’s report address problems that police reformers say have long plagued the department, but a good number of the proposals seem outdated. Over the past two years, Chief Bernard C. Parks, the Police Commission and the commission’s inspector general have either embarked on or proposed similar recommendations.

Among the commission recommendations that the LAPD already has moved forward on are:

* Adopting a new language policy aimed at improving contacts with people who speak little or no English.

* Creating an internal ombudsman position that allows officers to voice concerns about bias on an informal basis.

* Establishing a new system for categorizing and monitoring misconduct complaints.

* Having the commission’s inspector general audit complaints to evaluate the fairness of the process and the equity of punishment.

“A lot of the report is dated information that fails to note significant and recent progress,” Kalish said.

In a 41-page section dealing with the Sheriff’s Department, commissioners call on the Board of Supervisors to establish a civilian review board with the power to investigate and adjudicate complaints of police misconduct.

“The LASD is essentially responsible for policing itself,” the report said. “Although the sheriff has instituted reforms to increase accountability, critics are not satisfied that the department will be able to keep itself in check.”

Commissioners also expressed concern over reports that some deputies have formed self-styled “gangs” with macho monikers like the Vikings, Grim Reapers and Tasmanian Devils.

Although sheriff’s officials testified that the groups were nothing more than “sports teams and social clubs,” others were skeptical. “Witnesses at the commission hearing were unshaken in their view that deputy gangs were responsible for terrorizing minorities,” the report said.

It called on justice officials to get to the bottom of the matter. “The seriousness and recurring nature of the allegations warrant an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice,” the report said.