L.A. County, U.S. to Pay $5 Million in Shooting

Los Angeles County and the federal government have tentatively agreed to pay $5 million to the survivors of reclusive millionaire Donald P. Scott, who was shot to death when surprised by police during a controversial 1992 drug raid that turned up no drugs on his isolated Ventura County ranch.

Scott’s survivors have long maintained that law enforcement agents conducted the raid mainly because they were hoping to seize the 200-acre ranch, just across the Ventura County line from Malibu. They allege that agents falsified information to obtain a search warrant, hoping to find enough drugs to justify seizing the ranch under drug asset forfeiture laws that would allow their agencies to keep the profits from such confiscations.

Ventura County Dist. Atty. Michael Bradbury, whose investigation came to the same conclusion, said Tuesday that the settlement should send a message to law enforcement officers.

“Scott should be alive today, and $5 million certainly can’t replace him,” Bradbury said. “But, hopefully, it will deter this kind of conduct.”

Officials deny the charges, but said they agreed to settle because they are not confident that jurors would believe what government agents say.

“That’s why this case finally settled,” said Dennis Gonzales, principal deputy Los Angeles County counsel, who represents the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, the lead agency in the raid. “We have to be realistic in the marketplace of today.”

Gonzales said sheriff’s officials were particularly concerned about fallout from the so-called Rampart scandal involving the Los Angeles Police Department. An LAPD gang officer assigned to the Rampart Division said he and colleagues framed and sometimes shot innocent people. So far, 11 criminal convictions have been reversed as a result of the LAPD scandal.

“There’s been a lot of bad press concerning the Rampart case,” Gonzales said. Sheriff’s officials “felt that was a consideration.”

Under the terms of the tentative settlement, outlined Tuesday to U.S. District Judge Dickran Tevrizian, Los Angeles County will pay $4 million and the federal government will pay $1 million. All suits against the government stemming from the raid will be dropped.

Assistant U.S. Atty. James Sullivan declined to comment on reasons for the settlement, which still must be approved by the Interior Department, Drug Enforcement Administration and Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. But government lawyers said they expect approval within 90 days.

The plaintiffs--Scott’s wife, four children and estate--will split the proceeds in a formula yet to be determined.

*

Plaintiffs attorney Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., who represents Scott’s wife, Frances, said in an interview that family members will receive between half and two-thirds of the money, with the rest going for legal fees and expenses.

Cochran said his client, who saw her husband killed and later lost her home to a fire, now lives in “a tepee” on the property and is trying to hold off government claims to seize it for unpaid taxes.

Scott, 61, was killed by the deputy in charge of planning the raid. When Scott emerged sleepy and drunk from his bedroom, he allegedly had pointed a pistol at the officer.

The shooting was held to be justifiable, because Deputy Gary Spencer was in fear for his life. But Spencer’s right to be in Scott’s house was questioned.

Bradbury--in whose jurisdiction the raid occurred--investigated and concluded that Spencer, a veteran narcotics officer with a clean record, used false information to secure a warrant to search Scott’s ranch for marijuana plants.

“There was no marijuana on that place,” Bradbury said. “Clearly one of the primary purposes was a land grab by the Sheriff’s Department.”

Spencer said he had heard from an informant that 3,000 to 4,000 marijuana plants were growing on Scott’s ranch.

In corroboration, a veteran DEA agent, Charles Stowell, said he saw 50 marijuana plants without using binoculars from 1,000 feet above the ranch.

Stowell “either was badly mistaken or fabricated” the sighting, Bradbury said.

The prosecutor also accused Spencer of misconduct.

Responding angrily, former Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block issued a report of his own, defending the agents and condemning Bradbury for grandstanding. Then-state Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren backed Block and Spencer, asserting the deputy had done nothing wrong, and sued Bradbury for libel. But his case was tossed out of court.

*

Bradbury said he had no regrets about his unusual decision to criticize law enforcement colleagues in a case he described as exposing “the ugly underbelly . . . of the whole asset-forfeiture program.”

The state forfeiture law has been changed partly because of the Scott case, Bradbury said.

“But what may still be needed is better officer training, better police procedures and a different philosophy by law enforcement,” he said.

Despite the criticism it brought him, Bradbury said the Scott report was one of the proudest moments in his 33-year career.

“The issuance of that report was a sea change in the way law enforcement operates in investigating the conduct of other police agencies,” he said. “Historically, one law enforcement agency doesn’t criticize another, especially when the stakes are as high as in this case.”

*

Times staff writer Daryl Kelley contributed to this report.

’ Scott should be alive today, and $5 million certainly can’t replace him. But, hopefully, it will deter this kind of conduct.’