Where Was the D.A.?

It’s clear that Los Angeles police officer Rafael Perez should have been fingered as a problem cop before he was caught stealing cocaine from the police evidence locker in 1998. How long before is open to question, but a good chance was missed in June 1997 by both the department and the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

Perez, who turned jailhouse songbird in exchange for a significantly lighter prison sentence, has subsequently told authorities that a band of Rampart Division officers planted evidence to arrest innocent people, beat suspects, covered up unjustified shootings and perjured themselves, among other abuses.

In the 1997 case, in which Perez was a primary officer, Deputy Dist. Atty. Michael Kraut and Kraut’s boss, Richard Sullivan, were “concerned enough to dismiss the case” because Perez lied about who his partner was at the time of the arrest, Kraut wrote on a case document. Kraut wrote that Perez “did not tell the truth” and that “Perez has arrested” the defendant “2 times before and our office declined to file” both times. Further, Kraut wrote, “this case has been difficult from the beginning. The defense has been asserting that Perez is after [the defendant]. . . . [Detective Terry] Wessel from Rampart CRASH tells me it is fine to dismiss due [to] officer credibility and also informs me that he knows of problems with Perez.” Perez has said that Detective Wessel conspired to cover up police crimes and misconduct at Rampart. This would be a complete supervision failure at Rampart, which at least the LAPD has acknowledged.

Not so at the district attorney’s office, which also clearly dropped the ball. Why didn’t the prosecutors flag the rest of Perez’s cases right then and there? The D.A.’s office contends it was enough to notify the LAPD. No.

The Rampart scandal may cost the city hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuit payouts. Part of the responsibility will have to rest on the D.A.’s office, which should take a hard look at its own practices and probe why the Kraut memo did not raise alarms. If a police officer’s testimony is known not to be reliable, the office of Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti has a duty to investigate further, especially when other convictions may be affected. The system rewards prosecutors who win. But as we now know too well, winning at any price is expensive.