Retry 3 Officers in Rampart Case

Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley should retry three suspended Los Angeles police officers whose convictions in the Rampart scandal were overturned by the presiding judge. The prosecution, in part because it can call witnesses excluded at the first trial, can make a better case. A retrial would also emphasize the importance of the Rampart prosecutions to the city.

Los Angeles Police Department Sgts. Edward Ortiz and Brian Liddy and Officer Michael Buchanan were convicted by a jury last month of conspiracy to obstruct justice and perjury in the department’s ongoing corruption scandal. The convictions stemmed from a 1996 police raid in which suspects Raul Munoz and Cesar Natividad were arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon with intent to commit great bodily harm. The two suspects allegedly struck two of the officers with their vehicle while attempting to flee.

Superior Court Judge Jacqueline A. Connor threw out the convictions against the officers because, she said, she had committed a “fatal error” in not addressing a jury question about the assault charge. The judge said she realized, too late, that the jury might have been confused about the meaning of the charge--in that “great bodily harm” need not actually be claimed for the charge to be filed--and thus wrongly convicted the officers. The judge also cited insufficient evidence.

The prosecution deserves another shot, and the judge should recuse herself from a retrial. The prosecution could appeal the judge’s order, but it should have the confidence to undertake a retrial with the potentially stronger evidence now available.

A primary prosecution witness, former LAPD Officer Rafael Perez, the chief source for the Rampart charges, did not testify in the original trial because an ex-girlfriend had spuriously leveled murder accusations against him. She did not admit she had lied until the day the jury in the Ortiz, Liddy and Buchanan case began deliberations. Many officials have found Perez’s stories credible enough to throw out 100 convictions and to have agreed to $31 million in 42 legal settlements for those wrongly convicted.

Perez would be able to--and should--testify in a second trial. He has said the three officers made up the entire story of being hit by a truck driven by the suspects. Perez also said the officers faked a crime scene to make it appear legitimate. A jury should judge the veracity of his claims.

Also, Judge Connor blocked several prospective witnesses for the prosecution from testifying because prosecutors had not told defense attorneys about them until the trial was about to begin. The judge could just as easily have delayed the trial to give the defense time to prepare. Another unforeseen problem hit the relatively young prosecution team when its seasoned leader, Assistant Dist. Atty. Daniel Murphy, withdrew before the trial for health reasons.

Real reform of the Police Department is perhaps finally on its way, and this first major case should be fully pursued. A retrial will allow a stronger prosecution case to be made.