California Man Gets $900,000 Settlement for 'Psychological Torture' During 17-Hour Police Interrogation
Detectives in Fontana, California, told Thomas Perez Jr. that his father was dead and that he killed him. Neither was true.

The California town of Fontana will pay $900,000 to settle a federal civil rights lawsuit after police falsely accused a man of murdering his father, interrogated him for 17 hours, threatened to have his dog euthanized, and withheld medication from him, eventually leading the distraught man to give a false confession and try to commit suicide in the police station.
His father was alive the whole time.
The case, first reported by the San Bernardino Sun, is a particularly deranged example of how abusive police interrogation techniques can produce false confessions. Reason has previously reported how several states around the country have tightened rules for police interrogations of minors, banning deception and requiring lawyers to be present.
But even adults can be pushed into confessing a crime they didn't commit, as the case of Thomas Perez Jr. shows.
In 2018, Perez reported to the Fontana police that his 71-year-old father, Thomas Perez Sr., had disappeared the previous day while taking the family dog out for a walk. The dog had returned without the elder Perez.
Perez Jr. agreed to go to the police station to talk to detectives. While there, the police obtained a search warrant for the family's house, and based on small blood stains around the house and an alert from a corpse-sniffing dog, their suspicions turned to Perez Jr.
Video of Perez Jr.'s interrogation showed that Fontana police told him, falsely, that they had already found his father's corpse and that there was evidence pointing to him as the murderer. According to his lawsuit, he was kept in police custody for 17 hours, during which detectives berated him, refused to let him sleep, and wouldn't let him retrieve his medications for depression, stress, asthma, and high blood pressure.
"At one point while they are telling him to confess, he starts pulling at his own hair, hitting himself, making anguished noises, tears off his own shirt, and nearly falls to the floor," U.S. District Judge for the Central District of California Dolly Gee wrote in an order in Perez Jr.'s case, summarizing the video. "During this episode, the officers laugh at him and tell him that he is stressing out his dog. Later, they tell him that they are going to give away his dog."
Detectives in fact brought Perez Jr.'s dog into the interrogation room so he could say goodbye to it. Perez then confessed to stabbing his father with a pair of scissors.
After confessing, while he was left alone in the interrogation room, Perez Jr. tried to hang himself with his shoelaces. He was taken from the police station and temporarily committed to a psychiatric hospital.
While the younger Perez was in the hospital, police located the elder Perez alive and well at Los Angeles International Airport, where he was flying to Oakland to see his daughter.
Perez Jr. filed a lawsuit against Fontana in 2019, alleging that the Fontana police violated his due process rights, as well as his constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure and excessive force.
The Supreme Court ruled it was lawful for the police to lie during interrogations in 1969, in Frazier v. Cupp, a case where a man challenged his murder conviction on the grounds that police had claimed that the man's cousin had already confessed and implicated him, which was not true.
At the time, a mentally sound adult falsely confessing to a crime was considered a myth. The advent of DNA testing has shown that it is an all-too-real phenomenon. According to the Innocence Project, nearly 30 percent of DNA exonerations involved false confessions. Only a third of those false confessors were 18 years old or younger at the time of their arrest.
However, police officers' freedom to lie during interrogations does not extend to physical or psychological torture. Gee wrote there was no legitimate government interest that would justify detectives' treatment of Perez Jr.
"A reasonable juror could conclude that [the detectives] inflicted unconstitutional psychological torture on Perez," Gee wrote in her summary judgment order, finding that their "tactics indisputably led to Perez's subjective confusion and disorientation, to the point he falsely confessed to killing his father, and tried to take his own life."
According to the San Bernardino Sun, three of the Fontana officers involved in Perez Jr.'s case remain employed with the department, while one has retired to enjoy his public pension.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Cops lie about a lot of things, but killing dogs isn't one of them. They really get off on the hurt it causes the owners.
Are you sure it isnt just a blind shoot? The argument you use to excuse Capitol officers?
Cops are trained, professional liars and their conscience has been brainwashed away. They delude themselves into thinking they are forcing the "truth" out of a suspect when in fact they are torturing them into admitting to whatever they have to admit to in order to stop the agony.
A proper interrogation (DS Jim Smyth interviewing Russell Williams):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsLbDzkIy3A
It’s absolutely BS that there are different rules for the government than for regular citizens. If I get in trouble for lying to a cop, a cop should get in trouble for lying to me. They aren’t special.
Oh, but they ARE special! tHiN BlUe LinE
Just tell us their names.
“Gee wrote there was no legitimate government interest that would justify detectives' treatment of Perez Jr.”
Sure there was. His name was Perez.
The victim should get far more money and all the officers should be jailed
They tried to frame him for murder. They should get the maximum punishment he could have gotten.
And the money should come from the officers (or at least their union), not the taxpayers.
That's a first. Not only did the police coerce a confession to a crime he didn't commit, they coerced a confession to a crime no one committed.
I bet that’s happened many times.
Martha Stewart
I’m surprised they didn’t murder the old man to cover for their mistake.
AT to show up to defend these shitty police officers in 3... 2... 1....
I watched the video of Mr. Perez's interrogation. It was hard to watch. The officers should be publicly named and barred from working in any type of law enforcement position again. They should also be tried for conspiring to falsely accuse Mr. Perez of murder. But, the state or city (tax-payers) will pay the civil damages, they will continue to work in law enforcement, and retire with a full pension (also paid by tax-payers).
I note that many of the same people who decry such actions by the cops in this situation also totally believe that there is no way that Trump, his associates, or the January 6th defendants could in any way be railroaded or falsely accused by law enforcement. THOSE law enforcement members are all totally honest and would never do such a thing!
and based on small blood stains around the house and an alert from a corpse-sniffing dog
I mean, that's not helping the guy's case or the conclusions that any reasonable person (and cop) would draw. Let's be honest.
"We found blood in your house, and our dog sniffed a corpse." I mean, what are they supposed to do, ignore that? (Remember they can only keep their suspect in custody for so long.)
Video of Perez Jr.'s interrogation showed that Fontana police told him, falsely, that they had already found his father's corpse and that there was evidence pointing to him as the murderer.
Yea, they do that. It's shady as all get out, but it's not illegal or unconstitutional. Remember, their goal isn't to be your friend or help you out of a tough spot. It's to secure what they need to justify your charges and provide evidence to the DA to substantiate them. They will lie, cheat, and manipulate however they can to this goal. Especially when they think - for good reason, in this case - that they've got their guy.
It's why you keep your mouth shut but for the words, "Attorney."
Also, look, I ain't trying to racist this - but Thomas Perez Jr. doesn't know his rights? I did a bit of searching, and I can't tell if this dude is illegal or not (and I ain't about to sift through a kajillion bajillion Thomas Perez hits in Mexifornia just to find out). If he is, y'know, I don't really care about the psychological torture. Illegals get no pass from abuses in my book; you want Constitutional protection, go legit. If he's not, I also fault him for not knowing his rights. Especially since I guarantee he A) was told them; and B) should know them without being told if he's an American citizen.
If you don't know your rights, how would you ever know if someone is taking them away? Pretty simple.
and wouldn't let him retrieve his medications for depression, stress, asthma, and high blood pressure.
Almost certainly because they can't confirm what the drugs are, and didn't want to take the chance that he'd down a bottle to stone/off himself. Yea, that happens.
Also, those first two won't kill him; and those last two, there are medics on site. So, waah. He didn't have an asthma attack or a cardio-vascular event during custody - so, shut up.
"During this episode, the officers laugh at him and tell him that he is stressing out his dog. Later, they tell him that they are going to give away his dog." ... Detectives in fact brought Perez Jr.'s dog into the interrogation room so he could say goodbye to it.
Hahahaha, jerks. But still, lol. That's dark. Yea OK, that probably justifies the $900K worth of jerk penance. Still, lmao. Some twisted lateral thinking from the cops on this one, lol. (Apparently they've never seen John Wick.)
Perez then confessed to stabbing his father with a pair of scissors.
Oddly specific. Also, the fact that he tried to off himself. Innocent people don't generally do that. Innocent people protest the heck out of that. Did they check dear 'ol dad for stab wounds after he got back from Jokeland?
AT to show up to defend these shitty police officers in 3… 2… 1….
Yea yea, call me when they hit him with a phone book. Otherwise, *yawn*
Wow. So much rationalization. Only a cop can come up with this many lies to justify lying to and torturing an innocent citizen. Apparently you missed the part about how the man’s father wasn’t dead? I know reading is hard, especially for a bootlicker, but it’s a fundamental skill you should work on. And you knowledge of how the constitution works was clearly obtained from a Klan meeting. "Your book" is irrelevant, the constitution is what matters.
Pure evil.
No, I caught that part. I even asked a pretty germane question about it. I guess you were just too eager to rattle off your hot take before finishing the whole post? I mean, that tracks with you Headline LoFos.
Seriously - why am I the only one asking whose blood they found and why the corpse dog got worked up?
“Your book” is irrelevant, the constitution is what matters.
Not when it comes to criminal illegal aliens. Which I assume is what you were referring to when you used the term in quotations.
How'd you know he was a border jumper? I couldn't find that detail anywhere.
That is truly some impressive cop-sucking. Wow, a guy with stress issues is put into an incredibly stressful situation and denied his meds, and we're supposed to be suspicious of him if his behavior is anything less than perfectly rational? Lying to suspects may not be illegal, but it should be. Cases such as this show clearly why confessions are utterly unreliable.
Wow, a guy with stress issues is put into an incredibly stressful situation
EVERY police confrontation is a stressful situation. Wait a minute, I have a stringed instrument for this.
and denied his meds
Do you hear that? It sounds like... like, I don't know, a tiny violin.
Again - depression and stress won't magically kill you in a jail cell. And there was zero report - even by this guy - of an asthma or cardio incident. So, who cares if he was denied his meds. It had zero effect on anything. Tiny. Violin.
and we’re supposed to be suspicious of him if his behavior is anything less than perfectly rational?
No, like I said - things got oddly sus when he confessed to something VERY specific, and then when he made a suicide attempt. Like I said, normal not-guilty people don't do that. I'm not saying it's proof of guilt, I'm just saying - maybe look into that a little harder than you are.
Lying to suspects may not be illegal, but it should be.
Why? I mean, OK, Eighth Commandment. Fair enough. But something tells me that's not what you're getting at.
So why should lying to suspects be illegal? Especially since they can lawyer up at any time? Assuming they know their rights. Why didn't this guy know his rights? It's not the police's fault if you don't know your rights.
Cases such as this show clearly why confessions are utterly unreliable.
Again, ask yourself why his confession was so oddly specific? And what you make of the blood stains and corpse dog. I would have loved to hear the explanation for that.
Police should not be allowed to lie to a suspect during an interrogation just like they can’t assault a suspect during an interrogation. It is a crime to lie to the police - or at least the FBI. If it is a crime for you, it should be a crime for them as well. Same act, just a different person.
Criminal: “Do you have any evidence against me?”
Police: “…. no.”
Criminal: *smirks*
Police interrogation is an investigative function. They’re trying to gather evidence. They don't bother when they have you dead to rights. They bother when they're worried they don't.
THAT’S why police are allowed to lie, manipulate, and coerce. And that’s also why you should NEVER talk to them without your attorney present.