Two From LAPD Indicted in Alleged Framing of Suspect

A federal grand jury on Wednesday indicted one current and one former officer from the Los Angeles Police Department’s 77th Street Division, alleging they violated a man’s civil rights five years ago by falsely claiming he had a concealed weapon.

The indictment was handed down while authorities continue to probe more recent allegations of misconduct, criminality and civil rights violations centered in the LAPD’s Rampart Division. Involving, as it does, alleged misconduct outside Rampart, Wednesday’s indictment could have significant implications for the U.S. Department of Justice’s ongoing pattern and practice investigation of civil rights abuses stemming from organizational shortcomings at the LAPD.

The alleged crime in the 77th Street Division was not immediately investigated, though a deputy city attorney sent a memo to his supervisors at the time detailing his belief that the officers might have perjured themselves in an attempt to frame an innocent man. City attorney’s officials said an LAPD supervisor also expressed concern about the arrest when it occurred.

Officers Edward Patrick Ruiz and Jon Paul Taylor, both of whom were stationed in the 77th Street Division, could face more than 10 years in federal prison if convicted of framing Victor Tyson, a man who had no previous criminal record, authorities said.

The federal civil rights charges are the first to be filed against LAPD officers since the prosecution of officers involved in the Rodney G. King beating, officials said.

Although not directly tied to the Rampart corruption investigation, the alleged crime mirrors conduct described by former-officer-turned-informant Rafael Perez, who contends that corruption went beyond Rampart and was routinely instilled in officers early in their careers.

According to authorities, Ruiz was Taylor’s training officer at the time of Tyson’s arrest on April 21, 1995.

The indictments, federal officials said, underscore U.S. prosecutors’ commitment to putting corrupt officers behind bars despite a difficult and time-consuming process. The investigation into Ruiz and Taylor took several years, authorities noted.

The U.S. attorney’s office eventually was tipped off to the alleged crime and sought the assistance of the LAPD and Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti, who provided “pivotal evidence” in the case, officials said. Other cases involving Ruiz and Taylor remain under review.

Officials from the U.S. attorney’s office said the indictments--and the stiff prison sentence they potentially carry--should send a clear message to officers implicated in the Rampart scandal, many of whom could face far more serious charges.

“Police corruption undermines the foundation of our city. Officers who use the shield of service as a sword to commit crimes jeopardize the safety of all of us,” said Alejandro Mayorkas, the U.S. attorney for the Central District of California. “We will prosecute corrupt officers as aggressively as the law permits.”

LAPD Chief Bernard C. Parks, who attended a news conference about the indictments, said he was “saddened with the fact that two officers dishonored our badge.”

Parks said Taylor resigned from the department in the midst of an internal affairs investigation into his conduct. Ruiz was found guilty of misconduct and suspended for 22 days--a punishment that Parks suggested was too lenient. As a result of the indictment, Ruiz, who has been working a desk job, will be relieved of duty.

Ruiz and Taylor could not be reached for comment. Their arraignment has not yet been scheduled.

According to authorities, Ruiz and Taylor were on patrol in the 7300 block of South Broadway when they saw two men acting suspiciously. The men ran away when the officers approached, prosecutors said. The officers gave chase, but lost the pair. But the officers found a revolver on the ground, which they then falsely claimed was Tyson’s, prosecutors allege.

But when the case went to trial in July 1995, it began to unravel.

Deputy City Atty. Evan Freed, who was prosecuting the case, detailed the problems he perceived in a memo to his supervisor, Susan Zimber, who supervised central trials for the office.

In the memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Times, Freed noted that Ruiz claimed in his initial report that he and Taylor had seen Tyson drop the gun, but that Ruiz later testified it was only Taylor who had witnessed the alleged act.

Taylor testified that, though it was dark and he was not using a flashlight, he could clearly see Tyson drop the weapon as he fled.

Freed decided to go to the scene one night and have a look for himself, and to interview the sergeant who approved Tyson’s arrest, hoping that he would back the officers’ account, according to the memo.

But his investigation only made him more concerned.

“I was unable to see the ground at all, and it is highly doubtful Taylor could have seen Tyson drop the gun if the lighting was the same or similar,” the prosecutor wrote of his visit to the 7300 block of South Broadway.

The next day the prosecutor interviewed LAPD Sgt. Richard Henry, who approved the arrest.

Henry said that he had a clear recollection of the night in question, and that it was Ruiz who claimed he saw Tyson drop the gun, not Taylor. The sergeant added that neither officer mentioned a broken window, which they told the prosecutor made them suspicious that there had been a burglary and that Tyson was involved. A business owner from the area had testified that there were no broken windows in any of the buildings in the area on the night Tyson was arrested.

According to Freed’s memo, even Henry said he “mistrusted” Ruiz when the officer reportedly stated, “Even if I didn’t see the suspect drop the gun, I am a ‘gun expert.’ I recover a lot of guns and know about these things, and I’m sure he dropped it.”

Freed was unimpressed by Ruiz’s alleged expertise.

“At this point I am not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of Tyson’s guilt,” he wrote in the Nov. 17, 1995, memo to Zimber. “I believe my ethical duty compels me to seek dismissal of this case before it goes to the jury.”

Zimber agreed, as did Municipal Judge Kenneth Lee Chotiner, who dismissed the case immediately.

Chotiner also praised Freed, who was at the time a rookie prosecutor handling one of his first cases.

“I am very impressed with all you have done,” the judge said, according to transcripts of the court record. “I have seen too many prosecutors--I’m not saying it’s your office or the D.A.’s office--that would still go ahead, bluff their way through and to try to convict somebody.”

The judge said LAPD internal affairs should be notified of the potential problem.

In an interview, Freed claimed the concerns he raised in the memo to his bosses were ignored.

Earl Thomas, assistant chief of the city attorney’s criminal division, denied that. Thomas said Zimber later asked Freed whether he thought the case should be brought to the attention of LAPD internal affairs, and that Freed said no.

Thomas added that at the time, the office saw no reason to notify the LAPD because Sgt. Henry, who approved the arrest, was already aware of the problem.

But in the wake of the Rampart scandal, he said, the city attorney’s office has enacted a policy change that requires prosecutors to inform internal affairs directly about issues of officer credibility.

LAPD Cmdr. David J. Kalish, the department’s spokesman, said he could not comment on Henry’s role until he knew more about it.

He added, “We are very pleased that [the city attorney’s office] has changed its protocols to make sure [internal affairs] is notified when they suspect serious misconduct, including perjury. It is unfortunate that those protocols were not in place at that time.”

Freed, who was on probation when he tried the Tyson case, was terminated by the city attorney’s office when his probation ended, officials said.

He later sued the city attorney’s office, alleging that he had been dismissed, in part, because superiors viewed him as disloyal for telling the judge about possible perjury and that City Atty. James Hahn and other managers “were far more concerned about the political fallout should the perjury come to light than with the prospect of sending an innocent man to prison.” In denying Freed’s allegations, the city brought the lawyer’s personnel file to court citing professional weaknesses, including, “deference to statements made by defense witnesses, recommending unreasonably low sentences and his low conviction rate.” A Superior Court judge summarily dismissed Freed’s lawsuit last year, records show.

* SUITS SETTLED

Council agrees to pay a total of $400,000 to two men who say police beat them. B1

* U.S. PROBE URGED

Council seeks federal probe. Spokesman says it will probably be rejected for now. B9