Rampart Officers Claim Malicious Prosecution

Three Los Angeles police officers who were put on trial last year for corruption-related offenses have filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging that they were falsely arrested, maliciously prosecuted and treated like “common criminals” by the LAPD and district attorney’s office, their attorney said Thursday.

“This ordeal has been devastating for them,” said attorney Etan Z. Lorant, who represents Officer Paul Harper and Sgts. Brian Liddy and Edward Ortiz. “They want vindication.”

According to a 30-page lawsuit, the three officers contend that their reputations were destroyed and that they were publicly humiliated as a result of the high-profile monthlong trial.

The trial ended in November 2000 with Harper being acquitted on all counts. Liddy and Ortiz were acquitted of some charges, but convicted along with another officer of obstructing justice. Those convictions, however, were overturned by the judge, who ruled that she had committed an error that tainted the jury’s verdict.

The district attorney has appealed the judge’s decision to set aside the convictions. That appeal is pending.

Among the defendants named in the officers’ lawsuit are Chief Bernard C. Parks, former Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti and ex-Officer Rafael Perez, whose admissions and allegations of police misconduct launched the investigation into what became known as the Rampart scandal.

The officers allege that Parks, Garcetti and others conspired to deprive them of their civil rights by falsely arresting them, searching their homes at gunpoint, fingerprinting them and bringing them to trial based on evidence elicited from convicted felons and liars.

The officers accuse Parks and Garcetti of being “incompetent and unfit to perform the duties for which they were employed.”

A spokesman for the Los Angeles Police Department would not comment, saying the LAPD does not typically respond to pending lawsuits. Garcetti was not able to be reached for comment, but a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office said prosecutors continue to believe in their case.

The officer’s lawsuit grew out of the April 26, 1996, arrest of an alleged 18th Street gang member named Allan Lobos. All three officers were acquitted of charges related to that incident. Liddy and Ortiz were convicted of conspiracy and perjury in connection with another incident.

According to police reports, Liddy and Harper were partners that night. Ortiz was a supervisor at the scene and approved Lobos’ arrest.

Liddy stated in his report that he saw Lobos apparently discard a handgun near the wheel well of a car as Lobos and other gang members fled from police. Liddy wrote in his report that he told Perez where to look for the weapon and that Perez recovered the gun.

Lobos was arrested and charged with being a felon in possession of a weapon. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to one year in jail and three years’ probation.

Perez, as part of an agreement in which he received five years in prison for stealing cocaine in exchange for identifying allegedly corrupt officers, told investigators that Lobos was framed on the gun charge.

Perez said that it was a patrol officer who discovered the weapon and that there was no evidence linking it to Lobos. Lobos, who was interviewed by LAPD detectives, denied having a gun. He said Liddy rubbed the gun against his fingers the night he was arrested and told him he was going to jail.

Jurors rejected the prosecution’s contention that Lobos was framed, voting to acquit all three officers in that part of the case. But that was after Judge Jacqueline Connor excluded five prosecution witnesses from testifying, saying prosecutors were too late in providing their identities to the defense.

After they were charged, the officers allege, the city and county officials made statements to the media in an attempt to influence the public against them and prevent them from getting a fair trial.

The officers allege in the lawsuit that they were retaliated against by police and prosecutors because they did their jobs and kept “the public and the streets safe from the gang members and drug dealers.”

Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office, said prosecutors stand by their decision to bring a case against the officers.

She noted that Liddy, Ortiz and Officer Michael Buchanan were convicted on some counts in the case, before the judge granted them a new trial--a decision that remains under appeal.

“We think we have a strong case on appeal,” Gibbons said. “We hope to eventually see these officers go to prison.”

Although their attorney discussed the lawsuit, the officers themselves declined comment. Of the three, only Harper has returned to work. Ortiz and Liddy remain “assigned to home” without pay, pending the resolution of their court case and LAPD disciplinary matters.