Part 144: An LAPD Battle in Court – Free Speech and Hacking in Los Angeles?

Published December 18, 2024.

Dec 19, 2024

Photo of activist Jason Reedy addressing Chief Jim McDonnell and the Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners on November 19 by author (GoPro Hero 11 Black).

Please support my work with your subscription, or for direct support, use Venmo, CashApp, PayPal, or Zelle using zachary.b.ellison@gmail.com

By Zachary Ellison, Independent Journalist

For the last two mornings, just after 9:00 am, the courtroom of Superior Court Judge Bruce J. Iwasaki was the scene of a test of speech in the workplace and the power of anti-hacking laws. The lawsuit filed with a boisterous press conference by the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) against two high-ranking Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers passed the first test but failed on the second. Attorneys for the defendants, Commander Lillian Carranza and Deputy Chief Marc Reina, had filed separate anti-SLAPP motions, which stand for a strategic lawsuit against public participation and demurrers, an objection that the lawsuit is legally deficient against the litigation brought by the LAPPL. The Los Angeles Times headline on the August 9 original story by journalist Libor Jany had asked, "Is it part of a broader rift?”

This question of internal politics in the LAPD is the one that needs to be answered and not one that was addressed before Judge Iwasaki on Tuesday and Wednesday mornings in Department 58 of the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. Now, in fairness to the LAPPL, they will get another bite at the apple with the option to re-file an amended complaint by January 20, 2025. Whether they choose to do so may be a question of how much money they want to sink into what’s legally a sinking argument. The LAPPL’s case centered on allegations of fraud and hacking might be described as the proverbial fishing expeditions, grounded in the completion of surveys with admittedly bogus credentials going back years, in fact beyond the statue of limitations for bringing the lawsuit forward. The union's other claim is that the two officials, by nature of their position, are not technically LAPPL members, even though they’re required to go through the union for benefits, and somehow breaking the law by opening their emails is speculative at best.

Judge Iwasaki at one point situated it in terms of “Yelp reviews.” The judge further stated on day 2 that “There is no hacking here; there is no changing of data.” Sadly, in Los Angeles, sometimes filing a lawsuit is all that matters, even if this isn’t the only city where legal harassment happens. The LAPPL had already expended a reported $140,000 for 60-100 hours of time from the so-called white glove firm Sourced Intelligence to investigate the matter. Other reports suggested that the LAPPL’s email lists were porous and already a matter that at least one former Internal Affairs detective felt was such a subject of potential weaponization that he demanded repeatedly to be removed. The detective, retired Sergeant William Kelly, had told former Knock LA journalist Jon Peltz in 2013 that he felt LAPPL General Counsel Robert Rico was a “keyboard warrior” and someone “who would attempt to interfere in internal affairs investigations.” The plaintiff LAPPL was represented by attorney Brian Ross in court by the firm Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC, which routinely represents “peace officers.”

For their part, Deputy Chief Reina opted to be represented by Deputy City Attorney Cody John Franklin, and Commander Lillian Carranza had outside counsel Leslie Anne Burnett of the firm Olivarez Madruga Law Organization LLP. It wasn’t so much that they outlitigated the LAPPL as it was that the case made on the face of it lacked merit. Whatever the ultimate limits of the idea of protected, public free speech in the workplace, Carranza and Reina had errored in taking the survey, at least allegedly in Reina’s case, given that the LAPPL isn’t known exactly for welcoming negative feedback. The LAPPL had gone as far as generating a YouTube video in support of their litigation against Carranza and Reina released on August 19 that’s racked up more than 4,000 views to date entitled “Carranza Shoes” and calling it a “cheating caper.” Perhaps never in LAPD history has the gossip been so digitized with the union alleging in their amended complaint that Carranza had used her ex-husband's serial number to complete surveys. An LAPD officer since 1989, Carranza was previously harassed with disparaging audio from a training session and a photoshopped sexual image, for which she secured a $4 million dollar judgment against LAPD.

Los Angeles Times journalist Richard Winton wrote about the matter in 2019 that her lawsuit was “the latest in a series of serious allegations made by women in the department describing a crude, sexist culture inside the ranks.” Whether new LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell will take steps to address this culture, much less negotiate with its union to not make a public display in court of matters that might otherwise be resolved, remains to be seen. A spokesman for the LAPPL, Tom Saggau, when asked if the lawsuit might have a chilling effect on free speech in the police department, suggested that this reporter had asked “loaded questions” and that there was no speech issue. Meanwhile, the union’s YouTube video made a particular point to highlight that Carranza had written that there should be a class for “command officers on how to grow a backbone.” The dustup comes amidst an ongoing and often quite public debate over the use of force in the department that has centered around a controversial shooting by the daughter of LAPPL Director Jamie McBride, LAPD officer and social media influencer Toni McBride.

A civil lawsuit by the younger McBride over the death of Daniel Hernandez and perceived retaliation by LAPD Chief Michel Moore ended in April 2024 in defeat; as Deputy Chief in charge of LAPD’s Training Bureau, Marc Reina hadn’t wanted to hire Toni McBride as shooting instructor over the out of policy shooting. Chief Moore had found that her final two bullets were in policy, but Police Comission differed finding she had violated departmental policy. The decision was later overturned by the State Attorney General’s Office and by an LAPD Hearing Examiner. More recently, as noted in Times journalist Libor Jany’s report on the lawsuit, there’s been a recent dispute over a use-of-force incident in the Hollenbeck Division and the role of Internal Affairs (IA) between Lillian Carranza and LAPPL President Craig Lally, with LAPD after a meeting between Carranza and former Interim Chief Domnic Choi initiating a “personnel investigation against Lally.” The status of this investigation is unknown; Lally had written in the union newsletter a headline that “INTERNAL AFFAIRS... IS BROKEN,” defending the shooting. LAPD, as a matter of policy, doesn’t comment on IA investigations, even as it maintains that the process is taken with seriousness. In a presentation at the Police Commission in LAPD headquarters, officials noted that the process is “agreed upon with the Los Angeles Police Protective League.” Litigation certainly is an expensive option.

Could the dispute with Carranza and Reina over the surveys have been resolved internally? Perhaps that might have even been more effective than taking it to court. Out of 4,086 complaints received by IA in 2023, 360 were made by LAPD Officers, and 381 were made by Department Employee’s (non-sworn), with an additional 42 coming from others in the “Judicial Partner” and “Other Law Enforcement Agency” categories. Overall, the IA presentation on November 19 found that between 2018 and 2023, out of just over 18,904 complaints total made, 23 were sustained against “Command Staff” (8.8%) and 2,091 were sustained against “Rank & File” (11.7%). LAPD investigates just about every single thing that it hears, but disciplining problem officers can take extraordinarily long, and terminating them can take even longer. As reform efforts have stalled. Reportedly, LAPD has finally sustained 2 complaints for “biased policing” with scant prior enforcement. More information on these cases is supposed to be coming; asked for comment LAPD Media Relations decline to provide detailed information.

If Carranza and Reina had violated in essentially providing biased responses to the LAPPL’s surveys as the accusation went, Judge Iwasaki had less certitude that the level rose to a violation of either State or Federal law in regards to hacking. The State Penal Code is Section 502, derived from the Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, with a federal analog on the books. “I’m not sure that the FBI should be investigating this case,” Judge Iwasaki remarked, further noting that “civil judges should be thoughtful.” The LAPPL had demanded that California State Attorney General Rob Bonta investigate the matter. Despite otherwise involving himself in relation to the LA Fed Tapes (which reeks of hacking) and redistricting, there’s been no indication he wants any part of this mess. The balance between administrative, civil, and criminal justice has never been so blurry in Los Angeles, and that clearly is a slippery slope. With Judge Iwasaki stating, “The way we conceive of the criminal law is the offense against the state” versus against a labor union or a police department, relating it to a “contempt hearing.”

Amidst a debate about whether civil liability in such cases could be found absent a criminal finding and a further question about whether Lillian Carranza and Marc Reina had truly injured the LAPPL, the clock was simply ticking away on the case. Judge Iwasaki was tired of the matter and pronounced judgment on the demurrer after all, rejecting one final time the idea that this was about free speech. Outside counsel the day prior had described their actions as “false speech,” which had also drawn a stern rebuke from the jurist. The ruling on Case Number 24STCV19837 for both Carranza and Reina was “the demurrers are sustained in their entirety.” To the point, “Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege the requisite injury.” Judge Iwasaki further added: “The only ‘injury’ alleged as a result of Defendants’ actions under Section 502 are that they participated in the survey which produced ‘data’ after completion, but is not in itself deletion of or damage to data as defined by the statute.” Judge Iwaski rejected further claims made by the LAPPL of “unfair business practices” and the idea that there was a larger “conspiracy.”

Time will tell whether the LAPPL comes back with an amended complaint, presumably on much narrower grounds. However, at least for now, the door was slammed on the case. One legal expert interviewed by Jany last August had remarked about the matter: “It certainly seems like an extreme reaction to what occurred here," suggesting that the union “may not be showing all of its cards.” The union’s headquarters is the site of a weekly protest by Black Lives Matter Los Angeles (BLMLA) called its “End Police Associations” rally. There have been efforts for years to push the organization out of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor (LA Fed) both internally as well as externally. Recently, BLMLA gathered to celebrate the defeat of Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León, whom the LAPPL had thrown its support behind before taking the loss to Ysabel Jurado. The LAPPL has some of the deepest coffers likely in the Los Angeles union landscape. Carranza and Reina might eventually recover attorney’s fees over the matter, but assuredly the union will still have plenty of money to back its desired litigation strategies. The lawsuit against Carranza and Reina was a clear shot across the LAPD bow that fits within a larger political strategy. A spokesman for the LAPPL, Tom Saggau, rejected my suggestion that there was “a score to settle.” A follow-up email went unanswered.

Arguably two of the most respected leaders in LAPD under new Chief Jim McDonnell, both Marc Reina and Lillian Carranza, are otherwise well-respected and highly qualified. Carranza was even in the loop to become Chief, although surely a longshot considering her past role as a departmental whistleblower on falsified crime statistics in a lawsuit. It’s no super secret in society that whistleblowers are often the target of retaliation, and indeed there’s even a dedicated organization for law enforcement whistleblowers: The Lamplighter Project, which tasks as its mission: “encourages whistleblowing activity in law enforcement by removing barriers to reporting, preventing retaliation, and elevating ethical officers.” If there’s a battle happening within LAPD, arguably between good cops and bad cops, we can only hope that the former comes out on top. Many, of course, think all cops are bad. Did the LAPPL have a case?

Only time will tell with complete certainty, but at least for tonight, perhaps the discord might die down, or perhaps things are being thrown and extra drinks are being had at the LAPPL headquarters. Who can say? The LAPPL, at least out of the gate, has been supportive of LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell, who has a long history in the department. Indeed, BLMLA had even suggested that in making the choice, Mayor Karen Bass was seeking to placate the union. In rejecting a proposed reform of the disciplinary process last summer led by Councilmember Tim McOsker, the Mayor had promised a more thorough review leading to reform. McOsker is a former attorney and lobbyist for the LAPPL. Perhaps this is a bigger issue that he could quite capably tackle?

In searching for a new chief, Mayor Bass visited police stations throughout the City of Los Angeles before hiring Jim McDonnell, with an accompanying report on the search being released by the Police Commission on the LAPD. The report found that “There is a significant disconnect reported between rank-and-file officers and LAPD leadership.” Additionally, it noted: “This gap contributes to a lack of understanding and support from those at the top, particularly in disciplinary matters.” Importantly, perhaps by taking on the role of disciplinarian in this case, the union learned just how hard it’s become to hold people accountable. The report further claims that “the officers have reported that the leadership has created a ‘gotcha’ culture where minor mistakes are punished more severely than they should be” and suggests that leaders lack street experience. This perception is highly problematic, and if anything, the scapegoating of Lillian Carranza and Marc Reina here should be a clear reminder that LAPD leadership has more work to do to earn the trust of rank-and-file.

Whether the boisterous leadership of LAPPL chooses to participate in trust-building is more problematic, creating a dynamic whereby it seems that for every step forward, LAPD takes two steps backwards. The scandal-ridden department clearly has to change, at all levels. The report found based on interviews with command staff that “recognizing the uniqueness of LAPD's culture and addressing areas requiring reform from an insider's perspective is seen as critical for the incoming leader.” Throughout America, corporate and public leaders turn to workplace survey’s as a way to collect feedback, but despite the common belief of many, it’s not protected free speech. If anything, Judge Iwasaki in striking down the anti-SLAPP on this basis that such speech no matter the type of organization isn’t protected, sidestepped an opportunity to be a free-speech warrior, suggesting that the overall argument was “somewhat broad.” So be careful what you put in those workplace surveys, and most certainly don’t dare to flood the responses.

Link: Lawsuit claims LAPD commander tried to ‘discredit’ police union. Is it part of a broader rift?

Link: LAPD union sues police commander over allegations of fraud and unlawful computer data access

Link: Los Angeles Police Protective League

Link: Sourced Intelligence

Link: LAPD Union Lead Attorney Mocks Internal Affairs in Email to Former Officer

Link: LAPPL YouTube Video - Carranza Shoes

Link: $4-million verdict for LAPD captain over fake nude photo shared by cops

Link: LAPD captain files sexual harassment lawsuit, alleging culture of sexism, cruel pranks in department

Link: LAPD officer who moonlights as gun influencer loses lawsuit over social media accounts

Link: California attorney general clears LAPD officer in shooting using controversial ‘expert’

Link: Reversal clears LAPD officer faulted for firing two extra bullets in fatal 2020 shooting

Link: California Penal Code Section 502