Panel Finds No Misdeeds by Parks

Five months after the LAPD’s inspector general accused Chief Bernard C. Parks of misconduct for his handling of one aspect of the Rampart corruption scandal, the Los Angeles Police Commission on Tuesday found that the chief had done nothing wrong.

“The commission determined that there was no misconduct,” according to a brief statement from President Raquelle de la Rocha.

The allegations against Parks stemmed from a heated dispute between the chief and then-Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti.

In March 2000, as prosecutors were attempting to build cases against allegedly crooked LAPD officers, Garcetti accused the chief of refusing to give his lawyers access to information gathered by the LAPD’s corruption task force. Prosecutors said they were told by LAPD officials that Parks had ordered everything to be turned over to the U.S. attorney’s office.

LAPD officials initially confirmed that Parks had cut off the flow of information to local prosecutors, but later that day the chief held a news conference at which he denied withholding any information and accused Garcetti of making “totally untrue” statements.

The Police Commission, at the time under the leadership of Gerald L. Chaleff, ordered Inspector General Jeffrey C. Eglash to investigate the matter and report back.

Over the next 10 months, Eglash interviewed nearly 30 people from the district attorney’s office, the state attorney general’s office, the mayor’s office and the LAPD.

In December, he submitted a confidential report to the commission in which he concluded that Parks had briefly sought to withhold information from county prosecutors investigating the unfolding corruption scandal and then made misleading statements about having done so.

In March, in response to an article in The Times detailing the contents of the inspector general’s report, Parks vehemently denied the allegations.

In all, the report recommended that commissioners sustain three counts of alleged misconduct against the chief: that he wrongly withheld information from the district attorney’s office; that he unnecessarily criticized Garcetti, and that he made misleading statements to the public and the inspector general.

According to Joseph Gunn, the executive director of the commission, the panel decided 5 to 0 that no misconduct occurred relative to the first two allegations. Commissioners were divided, however, on the allegation about misleading statements, voting 3 to 2 that it too was unfounded, Gunn said.

“The Police Commission statement speaks for itself, especially the last sentence, where it states that there was no misconduct,” Parks said in a prepared statement. Several commissioners declined to comment, citing confidentiality rules governing personnel matters.

Eglash issued a brief written statement responding to the commission’s decision.

“At the direction of the Police Commission, the inspector general’s office investigated this matter and submitted a report with our findings and recommendations,” he wrote. “The commission exercised its authority as head of the Police Department by taking the action it deemed appropriate, and I respect their decision.”

From the beginning, the commissioners seemed reluctant to address Eglash’s findings. The report languished for months before the commission put the matter on the agenda of a closed session.

When that occurred, in March, the statute of limitations to impose discipline was just days from expiring on some of the allegations.

The statute eventually did expire on two allegations as the commission continued its discussion of the matter over several sessions.

During its closed-door meetings, the panel was divided over the seriousness of the allegations, sources said.

The chief’s critics seized on Eglash’s findings to denounce his leadership, they said. In the current issue of the Police Protective League newspaper, one union official, in an editorial titled “Fire Him!” called for Parks’ ouster.

“The bottom line is he lied and he should suffer the same fate as any other police officer that is dishonest,” wrote Don Lint, a league director. “In the chief’s own words, ‘If you lie, you die.’ ”