Ban lifted on naming Pasadena police who killed gang member

A Superior Court judge lifted a restraint barring Pasadena from releasing the names of two police officers who shot and killed a gang member last year, ending more than a year of legal wrangling between the police union and the city.

After the February 2009 shooting, the officers and their union sought to keep their identities secret to prevent gang retaliation. A state court granted a temporary order barring the release of the names, after which The Times intervened, arguing that the public interest in knowing which officers use deadly force outweighed the officers’ privacy concerns.

Months after the shooting, The Times named the shooters in an article after reviewing law enforcement records revealing their identities. The officers were also recently identified in a federal civil lawsuit.

Still, the Pasadena police union continued its litigation against the city, arguing that the release of the officers’ names was a violation of state laws protecting the personnel information. Noting that the names had already been made public, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charles Palmer ruled the dispute moot Tuesday.

The legal tussle was sparked after officers Charles Glen Reep and Michael Alvarado fatally shot a 38-year-old Blood-affiliated gang member during a traffic stop.

Leroy Barnes Jr. was shot 11 times. Police initially said Barnes got out of the car and shot at the officers before the officers opened fire. But an investigation determined that Barnes did not fire at officers and that the first shots were fired during a struggle inside the car that spilled out onto the pavement.

Some residents and civil liberties advocates called for an independent investigation after the police account changed, questioning whether the officers had intentionally provided false information. Concerns also arose over the coroner’s finding that seven shots were fired into the man’s back.

Officials for the police union could not be reached Tuesday for comment.

Pasadena assistant city attorney Frank Rhemrev said he welcomed the judge’s ruling but said its effect on future cases was limited. Because the ruling was based on the fact that the initial dispute had become moot after the names were made public, no judgment was made on the wider issue of publicly disclosing officers’ names.

“This court never got to making an official legal determination as to who was right or who was wrong,” Rhemrev said. “The issues that were raised do need to be addressed. At some point in time, all those issues will be decided.”

Kelli Sager, an attorney representing The Times, called the judge’s ruling correct but agreed it would probably not have wider implications.

“We are pleased that Judge Palmer put an end to this meritless lawsuit,” she said. “Once the officers had been identified, there was no reason the officers and the union pursued this for another seven months.”

robert.faturechi@latimes.com