Hubler on Reform of the LAPD

* Re “Truth and Consequences for the LAPD,” Sept. 18: Shawn Hubler attacks “a hundred bogus convictions” in Rampart cases. As I understand it, 100 cases were dismissed not because the defendants were innocent but instead mostly because retrials would probably not be successful, because witnesses disappear and the defense attorneys would shout “Perez, Perez, Perez” to a jury brainwashed by the campaign against the LAPD.

I oppose the proposed consent decree because it omits any provision for curbing crime or making the city of Los Angeles and its citizens safer. Hubler should focus on the expense and proliferation of barred windows, guns in homes, burglar alarms and guard services and the increased violent crime. She should speculate on how a consent decree will be perceived by the cop on the beat and the extent to which the gangs, etc., will be emboldened. Whom will it benefit?

ERNEST E. JOHNSON

Los Angeles

*

Does Hubler know of LAPD officers Steve Gajda, my son Filbert H. Cuesta Jr. and Brian Brown III, all killed in 1998 by gang members? These three young officers are buried in cemeteries just like Juan Saldana, and they will not be coming to life again either.

I support and respect Chief Bernard Parks and the officers of the LAPD who lost their lives serving a community that did not respect them.

FILBERT H. CUESTA SR.

Whittier

*

Re “Unarmed Driver Slain by Police Is Identified, Sept. 19: Here we go again. Another day, another shooting by the LAPD. It’s time for the patrol officers to start practicing restraint and patience when subduing offenders of the law. If this lack of restraint and use of lethal weapons continues, the doors of the patrol cars should be changed from “To Protect and Serve” to “Shoot First and Ask Questions Later.”

JEFF GLENN

Los Angeles