Police Abuse

LAPD Officers Falsely Identified Drivers as Gang Members To Boost Their Numbers

Chief Michel R. Moore: "There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report."

|

An internal investigation uncovered several officers within the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) falsely identified innocent Californians in traffic stops as gang members in an effort to make their police work appear more successful.

A statement released Tuesday by the LAPD says that the investigation began in 2019 when a mother living in San Fernando Valley contacted the department after receiving word from the LAPD that her son was a gang member. A supervisor at a local station investigated body camera footage and other documentation gathered by an officer and found inconsistencies with the information provided. The department has not disclosed any other details about how the investigation began. 

The woman's son's name was cleared and three officers were investigated as a result. An Internal Affairs investigation found that over a dozen officers assigned to Metropolitan Division crime suppression duties had falsified information on field-interview cards to identify non-gang members as belonging to gangs. 

The offending officers were either "assigned to inactive duty or removed from the field," according to the statement.

"An officer's integrity must be absolute," said LAPD Chief Michel R. Moore in the statement released Tuesday. "There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report."

Both the LAPD's traffic stops and California's gang database have faced scrutiny. The Los Angeles Times reports that nearly half of the drivers stopped by the division are black, despite blacks comprising only 9 percent of the city's population and the fact that such stops had a low arrest rate. The LAPD announced last fall that it would reduce the number of random stops due to the disparate impact on minorities.

Reason's Scott Shackford has also covered the gang database. In addition to its numerous privacy abuses and errors, an audit revealed that some gangs were added to the database without the proper documentation showing that they met the state's definition of a gang.

Advertisement

NEXT: Groups Call for Justice Department To Investigate Mississippi Prisons after Violence Leaves Five Inmates Dead

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I want to know how Karen had enough pull to trigger an LAPD investigation. This seems unusual.

    1. plot twist, she works in the mayor’s office (I’m just guessing based off of how California works, I have no idea)

  2. “There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report and let it get exposed to public scrutiny.”

  3. >>in an effort to make their police work appear more successful.

    Anaheim cycle brigade used to pull us over on the way to school en masse at the end of each month to fill ticket quotas

  4. “There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report.”

    “There is, however, a place in prison for such an individual.”

    1. As a guard, right?

    2. What about at the NYPD?

  5. “The offending officers were either “assigned to inactive duty or removed from the field,” according to the statement.”

    No one was actually fired or had his pay docked, or arrested, or anything of an actual negative consequence. Six figure pensions are still in effect.

  6. So apparently there is a place in the department for someone who would purposely falsify information on a Department report.

  7. 2 of these statement do not square with each other:

    “There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report.”

    however…

    The offending officers were either “assigned to inactive duty or removed from the field,” according to the statement.

    Sooooo I guess there is a place within the police department for officers that that falsify information. That place is desk work at the HQ.

    1. Bingo.

  8. They have been assigned to training new officers how to falsify information, hopefully without posing for group pictures showing them giving Nazi or KKK salutes.

  9. Cops just wanna get home at night! (Or something like that)

  10. “The whole good cop/bad cop question can be disposed of much more decisively. We need not enumerate what proportion of cops appears to be good or listen to someone’s anecdote about his Uncle Charlie, an allegedly good cop. We need only consider the following: (1) a cop’s job is to enforce the laws, all of them; (2) many of the laws are manifestly unjust, and some are even cruel and wicked; (3) therefore every cop has agreed to act as an enforcer for laws that are manifestly unjust or even cruel and wicked. There are no good cops.” ~Robert Higgs

  11. “An officer’s integrity must be absolute,” said LAPD Chief Michel R. Moore in the statement released Tuesday. “There is no place in the Department for any individual who would purposely falsify information on a Department report.”
    “The offending officers were either “assigned to inactive duty or removed from the field,” according to the statement.”

    So not fired. No place, indeed.

  12. “ The LAPD announced last fall that it would reduce the number of random stops due to the disparate impact on minorities.”

    What the hell is a “random stop”?

  13. The offending officers were either “assigned to inactive duty or removed from the field,” according to the statement.

    Question for the “noble” full of himself politically correct Head Cheese at LAPD:

    Do those forms not contain the language, somewhere near where the guy in the government issued costume signs his name, to the effect “I hereby swear or affirm that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, under penalty of perjury”?

    Yes, No?

    If yes, then EVERY ONE OF THESE FORMS that contains the false statement about gangs (or anything else) is one more felony perjury count.
    WHEN will they be appropriately indicted?

    If that does not work, next question: do these officers swear an oath, upon becoming an ossifer, wherein they attest they WILL uphold and affirm the Constitutions of both the United States and the State of California?

    Yes, no? If yes, they have committed felony perjury and should be charged.

    This falsificatiion will not end until such consequences befall those worthy of them, without fail.

    There is the sign at my local FFL which warns “don’t lie for the other guy”, and informs of the penalties for lying on the 4473 and/or buying a gun and supplying it to a Prohibited Person. I think its five years in the FedPen each count. And YU never get to touch a firearm again. There should be a sign in the lounge down at the CopShop saying to the effect ANY falsification on ANY report will lead to IMMEDIATE dismissal and appropriate criminal charges laid. All it would take to straighten up any Department, Division, shift is for one, or if a hardcore lot, perhaps two, ossifers handing over their duty weaponm badge, cute costume, keys to their car, their duty laptop, a the door along with charging papers, and the problem is gone forever.

  14. “There’s no place in the department for any individual who would falsify information on a department report”? And he said that with a straight face? Because I’ve never known a cop (and I’ve known more than my fair share) who wouldn’t lie, even under oath, to protect another cop.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.