Ex-Prosecutor Defends Actions in Rampart Case

A judge, a police officer and a gang member testified for the prosecution in the first Rampart police corruption trial Tuesday as the district attorney’s office struggled to show that four LAPD police officers routinely lied and framed innocent people to rid the streets of gangs.

The judge--a former prosecutor in the hard-core gang unit--defended his handling of an allegedly tainted conviction that at the time seemed like a simple plea bargain.

The police witness, pressed by a prosecutor, admitted on the witness stand that she had kissed a defendant on the cheek outside the courtroom.

And the gang member had barely been sworn before his lawyer was permanently ejected from the courtroom--allegedly for making disparaging remarks about the judge presiding over the case.

So went another day in a case in which cops sit at the prosecution and defense tables and the status of the star prosecution witness remains uncertain because federal authorities are investigating him in connection with possible murders.

On trial are suspended LAPD Sgts. Edward Ortiz, 43, and Brian Liddy, 38, and Officers Paul Harper, 33, and Michael Buchanan, 30. They are charged with conspiring to obstruct justice by planting evidence and lying on police reports and in court.

Tuesday’s testimony began with Superior Court Judge Mark Arnold, who as a hard-core gang prosecutor handled the 1997 case of Raul Munoz and Cesar Natividad. The men pleaded guilty to assault causing great bodily injury. Munoz, who had a prior conviction, was sentenced to three years in state prison. Natividad was released after serving 270 days in County Jail followed by probation.

Prosecutors now allege that those convictions were a frame-up orchestrated by Rampart CRASH officers. They say Liddy and Buchanan exaggerated their injuries and falsely stated that the suspects had tried to run them down.

During his testimony, Arnold acknowledged having slight doubts about the case. He said he wondered why the officers weren’t more seriously hurt or the truck damaged, but decided those questions could be explained away if the case went to trial. “I believed I had enough information to prosecute the case,” he said.

Under barbed cross-examination by defense attorney Barry Levin, Arnold denied that his investigation in the case was lacking. He testified that he did not question why the police reports didn’t contain the names of civilian witnesses. He did not go to the scene or knock on doors. He told jurors he believed the police officers were telling the truth.

“If there were people that had a contrary description of what occurred, I certainly would want to speak with them,” Arnold testified. “I can’t talk to someone I didn’t know existed.”

Arnold was followed to the stand by LAPD Officer Raquel Duarte Argomaniz, who spent the summer of 1996 as a member of Rampart’s CRASH unit. For two of those months her partner was Rafael Perez, the admittedly corrupt officer whose confessions spawned the yearlong Rampart investigation, targeting more than 70 officers and leading to the overturning of more than 100 tainted convictions.

Argomaniz spent most of the day testifying about a police raid on a gang meeting the night of July 19, 1996. They were looking for a gang member named “Stymie” who was wanted for murder, she said.

The officer testified that as she and other CRASH colleagues moved in on the gang meeting in the alley, she found herself in the middle of the action. Ahead of her, a dark blue pickup truck accelerated and swerved toward her. She said she drew her gun and ducked behind a telephone pole.

The truck veered away and she stopped watching it, Argomaniz testified. Had it continued toward her, she would have considered firing, she said.

Because of her position behind the pole, Argomaniz said, she didn’t see the truck hit anyone, nor did she hear a thud or glass breaking.

Deputy Dist. Attys. Anne Ingalls and Laura Laesecke charge that Buchanan and Liddy were never struck by the truck, and concocted the story later to frame two gang members, Natividad and Munoz.

In her opening statement, Laesecke told jurors that no one saw the officers being struck, and no one heard them say anything about it until later.

Laesecke tried Tuesday to keep a crucial statement of Argomaniz from the jury. But the judge ruled that the statement could be heard, and the witness was able to tell the whole story.

She said that while she didn’t see Buchanan get hit, he told her about it within minutes when she noticed his injuries. “When I looked at his legs, I saw that his pants were torn and his knees were bloody. I asked him, ‘Are you OK?” “ she said. “He told me the truck hit him and [he] was OK.”

Under cross-examination--again by Levin--Argomaniz admitted she had heard about the police code of silence--but stated that if she observed a fellow officer engaging in wrongdoing, she would report it to a supervisor.

The prosecutor pounced on her own witness during redirect questioning. “Did you kiss Liddy in the hallway?” she asked.

Yes, in greeting, Argomaniz responded. He is a friend, she added. Under the prosecutor’s questions, she acknowledged friendships with the other defendants as well.

The biggest courtroom fireworks occurred at the end of the day when Christopher Barling, a detective with the LAPD’s Rampart Corruption Task Force, and others told Superior Court Judge Jacqueline A. Connor that an attorney had been making disparaging remarks about her from the spectators’ section. They identified the man as civil rights attorney Gregory W. Moreno, who represents Munoz and Natividad and about two dozen other people who say they were framed by Rampart officers.

While Moreno was outside the courtroom, Connor announced that he and a colleague were permanently forbidden to attend the trial. Within moments, Moreno steamed into the courtroom, demanding to know why he had been excluded. No one would tell him.

“I want to know what I’ve been accused of, your honor,” he said. “People who told you that, I’m sure it’s self-serving.” Connor asked him if he wished to make a statement. Moreno persisted in his questions, prompting the judge to say he was not entitled to conduct an interrogation.