[ad_1]
Sheriff Robert Luna sued the county’s civil oversight board this week, asking the court to determine whether it should comply with the committee’s subpoena and asks whether it would require information on deputy misconduct and use of force.
The lawsuit, filed in LA County Superior Court, comes after the oversight committee issued a subpoena requesting records relating to three controversial cases in which lawmakers beat and shoot young men. Several of the lawmakers involved have been fired and either prohibited from being sworn police officers or pleaded guilty to a federal crime.
The department’s response to the subpoena is scheduled for Thursday morning, but the lawsuit filed earlier this week said it is unclear whether the state law, which keeps most police officer records secret, is inconsistent with the legal requirements for complying with the commission’s subpoena.
“The Sheriff’s department is committed to law enforcement transparency and is committed to working hard to partner with the COC,” the department told the Times in an email statement. “This complaint is intended not to cause divisions between county sectors, but to gain clear guidance on complex legal issues surrounding what COCs can and cannot move forward. Without clarification of justice on this long-term disagreement, the department risks potential criminal, civil liability and erosion of public trust.”
Robert Bonner, a former federal judge who chairs the oversight committee, saw it differently.
“The sheriff regrets that he believes it is necessary to sue the Private Supervisory Board (the committee that accused him of oversight of his department) in order to seek guidance from the court,” he told The Times. “I think we’re interested in the sheriff’s decision to respond to the three committee’s subpoena on the night before to try and provide him and his department with a report of the use of force against citizens.”
In early 2020, the Board of Supervisors gave the committee the ability to direct them to issue subpoenas to the inspector’s office. Two months later, amid a series of sheriff’s department scandals, Los Angeles voters overwhelmingly approved the Measure R, giving the committee the authority to directly summon witnesses and records. A few months later, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a statewide law allowing subpoenas to watchdogs.
Over the past few years, the oversight committee has generally requested documents through the Public Records Act, including documents relating to prison deaths, deputy gangs and sexual misconduct. The Sheriff’s Department has taken over records at the request of some committees, but resisted other committees, stating that the records in question were confidential. In February, the committee took a stronger approach and issued a subpoena.
One of the subpoena calls for all investigative material related to the murder of 18-year-old Andres Gardodo, who was killed in 2020 by a lawmaker who shot him in the back after chasing a short leg. Both the relevant lawmakers were later sentenced to federal prisons in an unrelated case that admitted to lure and abuse skateboarders after yelling at federal prisons to select teens at Compton Park.
Another subpoena sought the record in the case of Emmett Brock, a transgender man who was beaten by a Norwalk aide outside the 7-Eleven in 2023. Last year, the incident got caught up in camera, and Deputy Joseph Benza pleaded guilty to federal civil rights violations for using excessive force.
At least eight other agents have been released from their duties after Benza made some terrible claims in his judicial agreement.
The third subpoena seeks records in connection with the 2020 case of Joseph Perez, who was beaten by an Industrial Station Sheriff’s Deputy. The department found it to be within the scope of the policy, but Perez disputed it and later filed a lawsuit. The case is still pending.
Each of the three subpoems signed by Bonner includes warnings for all caps. “The disobedience of this subpoena could be punished as a court’s denial of emptying. We will also be liable for the total of $500 and any damages arising from failure to comply.”
The department says some record inspectors who want to be secret under state laws that keep most types of deputies secret are secret.
The law in Section 832.7 of the California Criminal Code allows prosecutors, state superintendents and large ju judges to view confidential records when necessary during the investigation. However, the Sheriff’s Office says the law cannot be said to be permitted by the private supervisory board to view these records, and the court needs to be made clear that sheriff officials are not responsible for compliance.
This is not the first time a committee summons have encountered resistance from the Sheriff’s Office. In 2020, when the committee summoned former sheriff Alex Villanueva about his reaction to Covid-19 in prison, Villanueva questioned the legality of the move. The dispute ended in court, and in the end Villanueva agreed to voluntarily answer the committee’s questions.
When the surveillance officers issued more subpoenas, Villanueva similarly resisted them, filing multiple lawsuits. One of these cases led to a near-light empt hearing in 2022, but the court called it after Villanueva’s lawyer asked the High Court to intervene.
In late 2023, after he was no longer a sheriff, Villanueva finally testified under oath and agreed to answer questions about the deputy gang that were operating within the department.
In the lawsuit filed this week, the sheriff’s department tried to distance himself from Villan Eva’s approach, saying it had taken a “significantly different approach” from the previous administration. This stated that “we actively resisted COC oversight efforts and actively resisted demanding court intervention to enforce COC compliance with LASD.”
[ad_2]Source link
