LAPD Race & Justice War on Drugs Writers and Writing

OIG: LAPD Deployed “Ghost Cars” to Boost Patrol Numbers, Asset Forfeiture $$, Black Teens’ 21 Times Higer Risk of Death by Officer, and LA’s New Poet Laureate

INSPECTOR GENERAL FINDS LAPD MET PATROL GOALS BY SENDING OUT “GHOST CARS”

An investigation by the LAPD’s Office of the Inspector General found department supervisors falsified documents to augment the recorded number of cars on patrol to meet policy requirements. Department commanders in at least 5 of 21 divisions sent out “ghost cars” while the officers recorded as on patrol were actually completing paperwork or performing other duties, according to the report released Friday.

The LA Daily News’ Mike Reicher has more on the investigation. Here’s a clip:

To keep call response times down throughout the city, department policy requires at least one car to patrol each of the department’s roughly 200 geographic areas at all times. A workforce constrained by budget cuts and pressure to report positive statistics may have pushed commanders to manipulate information, some say.

“In the broadest sense, perceptions become reality,” Police Commission President Steve Soboroff said in an interview. “People perceive there are a lot of police in the street, but they would act differently if there’s only one car patrolling their neighborhood.”

Department spokesman Cmdr. Andrew Smith declined to comment until the full Police Commission addresses the report at its Tuesday meeting.

The investigation found that the officers’ patrol cars, which were reported to be responding to emergency calls, were actually parked at the stations or otherwise not on patrol. They are known as “ghost cars.”

[SNIP]

“It appears that the area personnel provided inaccurate accounts of actual patrol strength to [headquarters], and not to the public,” the report by Inspector General Alex Bustamante stated, “for the express purpose of meeting the patrol plan mandate.”

Bustamante’s report details one officer who was assigned to work patrol, but instead worked the equipment room checking out items such as microphones, rifles and car keys. Another spent six hours writing reports and conducting follow-up investigations in the station, despite his official status as patrolling. The report doesn’t list officers’ divisions or names, to protect whistleblowers’ confidentiality.


LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES USE SEIZED ASSETS AS FUNDING, BUY WEAPONS, GEAR, AND MORE

A new Washington Post investigation found that since 2008, local law enforcement agencies across the US have used billions of dollars obtained through civil asset forfeiture to buy things like weapons, gear, vehicles, a $637 coffee maker, and a clown. (No, we’re not kidding about the clown.)

The Post’s Robert O’Harrow Jr. and Steven Rich analyzed tens of thousands of expenditure reports submitted to the DOJ through the Equitable Sharing Program which allows law enforcement agencies to use the money they take from citizens. The investigation found that 81% of the $2.5 billion reported was taken from people who were never charged with a crime. But because people have to jump through hoops to prove they legally acquired the money or property that officers took from them, they do not often win it back.

(You can read our earlier posts about asset forfeiture here, here, and here.)

Here are some clips:

The details are contained in thousands of annual reports submitted by local and state agencies to the Justice Department’s Equitable Sharing Program, an initiative that allows local and state police to keep up to 80 percent of the assets they seize. The Washington Post obtained 43,000 of the reports dating from 2008 through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The documents offer a sweeping look at how police departments and drug task forces across the country are benefiting from laws that allow them to take cash and property without proving a crime has occurred. The law was meant to decimate drug organizations, but The Post found that it has been used as a routine source of funding for law enforcement at every level.

“In tight budget periods, and even in times of budget surpluses, using asset forfeiture dollars to purchase equipment and training to stay current with the ever-changing trends in crime fighting helps serve and protect the citizens,” said Prince George’s County, Md., police spokeswoman Julie Parker.

Of the nearly $2.5 billion in spending reported in the forms, 81 percent came from cash and property seizures in which no indictment was filed, according to an analysis by The Post. Owners must prove that their money or property was acquired legally in order to get it back.

The police purchases comprise a rich mix of the practical and the high-tech, including an array of gear that has helped some departments militarize their operations: Humvees, automatic weapons, gas grenades, night-vision scopes and sniper gear. Many departments acquired electronic surveillance equipment, including automated license-plate readers and systems that track cellphones.

The spending also included a $5 million helicopter for Los Angeles police; a mobile command bus worth more than $1 million in Prince George’s County; an armored personnel carrier costing $227,000 in Douglasville, Ga., population 32,000; $5,300 worth of “challenge coin” medallions in Brunswick County, N.C.; $4,600 for a Sheriff’s Award Banquet by the Doña Ana County (N.M.) Sheriff’s Department; and a $637 coffee maker for the Randall County Sheriff’s Department in Amarillo, Tex.

Sparkles the Clown was hired for $225 by Chief Jeff Buck in Reminderville, Ohio, to improve community relations. But Buck said the seizure money has been crucial to sustaining long-term investigations that have put thousands of drug traffickers in prison.

“The money I spent on Sparkles the Clown is a very, very minute portion of the forfeited money that I spend in fighting the war on drugs,” he told The Post.

About 5,400 departments and drug task forces have participated in the Equitable Sharing Program since 2008. Justice spokesman Peter Carr said the program is an effective weapon to fight crime but should not be considered “an alternative funding source for state and local law enforcement.”


PROPUBLICA: BLACK TEENS FACE MUCH HIGHER RISK OF BEING FATALLY SHOT BY OFFICERS THAN WHITE TEENS

ProPublica’s Ryan Gabrielson, Ryann Grochowski Jones, and Eric Sagara analyzed federal data on fatal “officer-involved” shootings of young males up to the age of 19. The analysis, which included 1,217 deadly shootings between 2010 and 2012 (as well as a larger pool of 12,000 incidents from as far back as 1980), revealed black teens faced a risk of being killed by officers that was 21 times greater than white teens.

Here’s a clip from the ProPublica analysis:

The 1,217 deadly police shootings from 2010 to 2012 captured in the federal data show that blacks, age 15 to 19, were killed at a rate of 31.17 per million, while just 1.47 per million white males in that age range died at the hands of police.

One way of appreciating that stark disparity, ProPublica’s analysis shows, is to calculate how many more whites over those three years would have had to have been killed for them to have been at equal risk. The number is jarring – 185, more than one per week.

ProPublica’s risk analysis on young males killed by police certainly seems to support what has been an article of faith in the African American community for decades: Blacks are being killed at disturbing rates when set against the rest of the American population.

Our examination involved detailed accounts of more than 12,000 police homicides stretching from 1980 to 2012 contained in the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Report. The data, annually self-reported by hundreds of police departments across the country, confirms some assumptions, runs counter to others, and adds nuance to a wide range of questions about the use of deadly police force.

Colin Loftin, University at Albany professor and co-director of the Violence Research Group, said the FBI data is a minimum count of homicides by police, and that it is impossible to precisely measure what puts people at risk of homicide by police without more and better records. Still, what the data shows about the race of victims and officers, and the circumstances of killings, are “certainly relevant,” Loftin said.

[SNIP]

The data, for instance, is terribly incomplete. Vast numbers of the country’s 17,000 police departments don’t file fatal police shooting reports at all, and many have filed reports for some years but not others. Florida departments haven’t filed reports since 1997 and New York City last reported in 2007. Information contained in the individual reports can also be flawed. Still, lots of the reporting police departments are in larger cities, and at least 1000 police departments filed a report or reports over the 33 years.


LUIS RODRIGUEZ NAMED LOS ANGELES POET LAUREATE

Last week, Luis Rodriguez, an iconic LA poet, novelist, memoirist, teacher, publisher, and advocate, best known for his memoir, Always Running: La Vida Loca, Gang Days in LA, was named Los Angeles’ second ever poet laureate.

(We at WLA think this is a wonderful thing, and we’ll have more on the story later in the week.)

LA Weekly’s Jennifer Swann has more on our new poet laureate. Here’s a clip:

As L.A.’s poet laureate, Rodriguez will serve a two-year term in which he’ll act as “the official ambassador of L.A.’s vibrant creative scene,” a sort of spokesman for the written word, according to a statement issued by the mayor’s office. It’s a natural fit for Rodriguez, who’s already been filling that role on his own, as the founder of Tia Chucha’s Centro Cultural, a nonprofit bookstore and cultural center that fosters art, literary and music workshops in the largely Latino community of Sylmar.

In his new position, the best-selling author of the memoirs Always Running, La Vida Loca: Gang Days in L.A. and It Calls You Back is expected to host a series of readings, workshops and classes at the L.A. Public Library, which sponsors the poet laureate program, along with the Department of Cultural Affairs. The program is aimed at educating inner-city kids with limited access to poetry.

38 Comments

  • Re: ghost cars, LASD has been doing this for years to meet contract city patrol requirements. Supervision ordering injured deputies and desk personel to log on with vehicles assigned as though they were working patrol. These deputies never left the station. Very few refused the fraudulent orders. LASD DOES function on retaliaton after all. Looks like the higher the rank the lower the ethics imo.

  • Just wondering if ProPublica’s report indicates how many police officers are assaulted and killed by black suspects compared to white suspects.

  • So how will those commanders be held accountable? I wonder how many LASD patrol captains created ghost cars to meet contractual levels in 2011/2012? Detectives assigned a CARP working cases at their desk never having even left the station parking lot? Sure, Regions were conducting monitors and audits. How many of those were white washes or just plain not monitored at all? Or could it have been the practice of creating “dummy logs” was encouraged at the executive level or at least tacidly approved. How many patrol logs were questioned which displayed 480 patrol minutes with little if any miles reported on the patrol vehicle? No calls assigned while every other unit on the roster took 459 reports?

    Whatever it takes for a promotion. Screw the cities and the public…… Some people ought to be ashamed of themselves. You know who you are.

  • The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department also has “Ghost Patrols”. This can be verified through an official audit at various Sheriff Patrol Stations.

    You may fool most of the taxpayers, however the citizens in the county areas are acutely aware ( the preying criminals also) of the shortage of deputies patrolling their assigned area.

  • OK. What is the point? Racist cops kill black kids at record levels for no good reason?

    Might it be that black youths are more involved in criminal activities and more likely to be armed? Activities which bring them into negative contacts with the police?

    I believe that a majority of blacks in this country understand that the breakdown of the family unit is more responsible for their young getting into trouble than anything else. They need to start speaking out and try to reslove this critical issue.

  • Interesting facts from US DOJ report from 2001. Between 1976-1998, 43% of the suspects who killed police officers were black. Young black males killed police officers 6 times that of white suspects. I am unaware of any recent reports on the subject.

  • @1 and @3 just like I have been saying all along. the sworn are shady and scandalous it doesn’t matter what their rank is. @3, those who know who they are could care less about having shame. They have no shame to their game that’s why there’s so much mess in this department. Yes, I seen many detectives supposed to be doing paid overtime or carp patrolling the streets but they’re in DB doing their work on their cases and yet getting paid overtime for supposedly to be out patrolling the streets. And watch Sgt’s, watch Commanders, and the Captain allow it. Hey public, do you feel any safer? Criminals, are you reading these comments?

  • Too bad ProRepublica and the Violence Research Group didn’t bother placing the shootings in the context of violent crime. Blacks account for 13% of the population, yet are responsible for 51% of all violent crime. If you separate for gender, the numbers are even worse. In essence, blacks are statistically speaking seven times more likely than whites to be involved in violent crimes. To then discover that they are shot by cops six times more often than whites is one of those “No shit, Sherlock” moments.

    Moral of the story: there is not just correlation, but causation between the two sets of numbers. Violent criminals will engage the cops in shootouts, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

  • Some indisputable facts here, Many stations, P.D.’s have been putting out “ghost cars ” for eons.

    Unincorporated areas ( with some exceptions, ) get the short end of the stick.

    Some unit commanders will do anything to please there bosses.

    What is so damning about any of this ? It’ s all about $$$’ s. black/whites filled with cops , cost dough !

  • Celeste: The ProPublica report fails to mention police officers are six times more likely to be killed by young black males than young white males. Something police officers have known for decades. How bout doing a report on police officers injured and killed by black suspects to add some balance to the article.

  • EDITOR’S NOTE:

    For the record, Bandwagon, the most recent year that the FBI has firm figures on felonious deaths of law enforcement officers is 2012, and for that year, 30 of the alleged assailants in which race was known were white, 16 were black. (Yes, in 2010, the numbers are different: 25 white/35 black.) The average age of the assailants in both those years was 31 years old, not the 15 to 19 years old of the young black men that are twenty-one times more likely to be shot and killed by cops than white young men of the same age.

    Also, of those teens who were shot dead fleeing arrest, 67 percent were black. (The percentage for young black men shot and killed fleeing arrest since 2010 is far, far higher.)

  • The study I found covered twenty years which was published by the US Dept of Justice. In that study 43% of the suspects who killed police officers were African American. Also police officers were six times more likely to killed by an African American than a white suspect. The age of the suspects were generally 18-35.

  • Celeste, should unarmed fleeing suspects be shot by the police, generally not. With that I agree regardless of race or age. Are police officers more likely to be killed or injured by an African American suspect….the factscspesk for themselves.

  • Celeste: Perhaps there is a correlation between young black males shot by the police and officers injured or killed by black suspects. I would hate to believe police officers are shooting people for no apparent reason.

  • Fact Finder: The article you mention dealt with black on white crime….my comments relate specifically to attacks on police officers by African American suspects. You are comparing apples and oranges. Also, the information I used came directly from the ultra conservative US Department of Justice.

  • @ Bandwagon. ………Quit while you think you’re ahead. It’s obvious where your state of mind (not stats) is and where you are going with this.

    @ Celeste…..Thanks for your input. Facts always trump feelings.

  • Fact Finder: You have no clue. Must be a left leaning liberal unwilling to look at the facts. That being said, no induendos please. Grow a pair and say what you mean.

  • Fact Finder: Instead of trying to label me a racist…debate me if you think my comments are not correct. My comments may not be politically correct, but point out where I am wrong.

  • Fact Finder, the US DOJ numbers speak for themselves. Blacks are over-represented in many dubious categories, and if you subscribe to social conflict theory then it’s easy to cast blame on others for one’s actions. I will venture to say the bulk of the responsibility of young black men dying at the hands of the police have to do with their own felonious actions. That does not excuse the occasional bad tactics, poor judgment, and racial animosity of the few who indeed are guilty of a bad shooting.

    Being objective on the issue involves looking at the totality of possibilities, not limiting oneself to a narrow set of facts or opinions. And yes, it means acknowledging the elephants in the room.

  • Facts always trump feelings. How absolutely brilliant. Fact Finder is very profound in his/her statement.

    Fact Finder,
    Perhaps you could be so bold as to give us lowly minions the reason why black teens are 21 times more likely to be shot by police officers than white teens.
    I’m sorry that I’m such a dullard, but in your oh so brilliant statement in #18 you left a simpleton like me in your intellectual dust. All I am able to deduce from your statement in #18 is that Bandwagon is incorrect and he’s speaking from an emotional pov ( “Facts always trump feelings). I guess I’m an idiot. I missed it where you gave us the factual reason why the disparity exists.
    Could you please dumb it down for idiots like us and give us the reason? It would be greatly appreciated and will most likely enlighten simpletons like me.
    Anxiously awaiting your response.

    Facts always trump feelings. That’s so awesome!

  • LATBG: You comments are obviously much more eloquent than mine. I ask for a little balance in the ProPublica story and I’m vilified for it. The issue with race relations, is the refusal of some people, mostly liberals, to accept reality when it conflicts with their views. I thank you for comments.

  • @LATBG……….I concur with you on 99% of what you stated, however the word “Occasional” is the word for “one or two”.What appears to be more fitting for more than a few would be “Seasonal”…..Just my observation.

    I hate all thugs………whether they wear gang attire or a uniform with a badge & gun

  • Well put, OH WELL. That is one serious misnomer: FACT FINDER. My guesss . he/she is still shaking its head wondering what the hell just happened. What a moron . fact trumps feelings… coin that . Soft, man , really soft.

  • @LATBG…….For clarification and no misunderstanding. I’m aware that the “THUGS” in gang attire (& otherwise) are many….. and the “Thugs” in uniform are minute and few.(unfortunately)

  • LATBG. You are one of the few contributors who actually makes the most sense (with backup). Some of the regulars on this blog (they know who they are) are “trumpet blowers” I’ll assume that you are currently active on the department.

    Some on this blog (particularly on this current subject) are obviously retired, IOD nursing pseudo injuries, and some are living vicariously through WLA with what “could have/should have” happened. You get the picture.

    You keep the contributors on their toes or hiding in the background if they don’t have pertinent or factual info. Just a FYI.

  • Fact Finder: I guess it’s easier to label someone a racist, than to debate the issues…….You have a lot of growing up to do my son……try a stint in the military…it worked for me!

  • @ Oh Well. ….Dial it back. When making appearances on EVERY THREAD, keep in mind that….. FAMILIARITY BREEDS CONTEMPT.

    “Chiming in” is fine sometimes. However “every debate” on every subject can do without a “guest appearance” from you. Granted, you do have SOME points sometimes and that’s enough.

    Don’t clench your jaws or pop a rivet because of this notification. Points to Ponder is in order.

  • Facts always trump feelings.
    Here’s a fact for you. Merriam’s/Webster’s Dictionary defines “occasional” as follows:
    Happening or done sometimes but not often: Not happening or done in a regular or frequent way.

    How about that. “Occasional” as a matter of FACT, does not mean “one or two”.
    Seasonal? I won’t even go in to that.

    It would appear (circumstantial evidence, not fact) that Fact Finder has a tendency to use stats (cherry picking them) to to back up his/her feelings. But facts always trump feelings.
    It’s a FACT that when confronted with stats or opinions that contradict his/her feelings, Fact Finder disputes accurate and correct definitions used by others, while at the same time using improper definitions of words to attempt to refute others and back up his/her feelings.
    No worries. You know why? Because facts always trump feelings.

    So tell us Fact Finder, is it a fact that you don’t know the definition of “occasional”? Or is it a fact that you tried to use an inaccurate and incorrect definition of “occasional” because that definition would back up your feelings?
    Not that it really matters. It’s easy to see right thru your attempts. What makes it so easy is that facts always trump feelings.

  • #30
    I’ll be more than happy to dial it back. Just as soon as occasional commenters stop insinuating that other commenters are racists (with absolutely no evidence to support the hideous accusation).
    Read comment #18.
    Provocative, sarcastic and snarky are three adjectives that apply to that comment.
    No?
    Is that not an objective assessment in your opinion?
    Please take notice of how I didn’t make a single comment until after #18.
    I’m not looking for a debate or argument. At the same time I won’t run from one when provocative and sarcastic comments are made that have no basis in fact and are meant to ridicule others.
    Or should I just let it slide in your opinion?

  • #30 Objective Perspective,
    Here’s a fact. Prior to this posting, of the last five threads posted I’ve commented on two. Of the last 77 comments made, six were made by me.
    There’s some stats for you. Those are facts that are not debatable.
    The facts are that I’m not making appearances on every thread, engaging in every debate, or monopolizing the conversation.
    It may very well FEEL that way to you.
    The facts say otherwise.
    And please remember, facts always trump feelings.

    Can we be done with this now?

  • Just wondering. What’s the rate black teens are killed by other black teens as compared to black teens being killed by cops?
    Yawn. Crickets.

    Hey, is that an elephant standing over there in the corner?

    No. It’s not.

    Sure looks like an elephant to me.

    It’s not what it appears to be. There’s no need for us to even discuss it.

    Come on man. I know an elephant when I see one. That’s an elephant.

    I won’t even acknowledge it, much less discuss it.

    Alrighty then. I think we’re done here.

Leave a Comment