TheAgitator.com
LAPD Pressured Coroner to Change Findings in Police Shooting
Thursday, January 8th, 2009From the L.A. Times:
The Los Angeles Police Department waged an aggressive behind-the-scenes campaign to convince coroner’s officials to change their finding that a SWAT officer’s bullet killed a 19-month-old girl held hostage by her father three years ago, according to records reviewed by The Times.
The intense lobbying effort, which involved one of the department’s highest-ranking officials, led to significant friction between the LAPD and coroner’s office. It also raises questions about whether the LAPD crossed an ethical line in pushing so hard, some medical and law enforcement experts said.
The department rested its case on self-serving conclusions by a four-year ballistics investigator with no medical training, challenging a team of experienced medical examiners in the county coroner’s office.
The department tried repeatedly to find a pathologist to review the case, according to the LAPD’s case log, which shows that Hudson tried to contact at least eight outside experts. One of the requests was made to the U.S. military’s pathology institute. When the institute refused to accept the case, Berkow formally appealed to the Department of Defense and was turned down again, records show.
The LAPD’s search led eventually to Dr. William Oliver, a forensic pathologist at the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. For a $2,000 consulting fee, Oliver agreed to review the case in the summer of 2006, according to the LAPD’s internal case log of the investigation. His conclusions, however, were not what the LAPD wanted to hear.
“There is little or no good evidence that the wound is from . . . a handgun,” he wrote.
I don’t agree with how often and under what circumstances LAPD deploys its SWAT team. But it is worth noting that this incident aside, they are extremely well-trained, and have a near-spotless record.
That said, while there’s nothing wrong with seeking an outside opinion, there’s plenty wrong with pressuring the coroner to change his findings before seeking an outside opinion. Kudos to the L.A. county coroner for holding his ground.
“Whether” they “crossed an ethical line” in pushing so hard to falsify their findings? That’s rich.
“It also raises questions about whether the LAPD crossed an ethical line in pushing so hard”
No. It emphatically answers those questions.
An object in motion remains in motion until acted on by an outside force.
Laws of physics apply to social relationships as well.
The LAPD (object in motion) continued down its path until resisted by the coroner’s office (outside force).
This should be unsurprising in the extreme. The LAPD is an institution, and like all institutions, it considers its self-preservation first — ahead of ethics, morality and justice.
Seems to me that this incident implies that at least part of the reason their record is so spotless is because they put so much effort into “cleaning” it…
My guess is that they put this sort of pressure on outside experts reviewing their actions fairly routinely. It’s only because this case apparently left no wiggle room for another interpretation that they weren’t able to bully someone into telling them what they wanted to hear.
” It also raises questions about whether the LAPD crossed an ethical line in pushing so hard, some medical and law enforcement experts said.”
Not really. It seems rather cut and dry.
Cops lie. This is just another example. Is it any wonder that juries don’t believe police testilying and the judge and prosecutor conspire to remove all but the most pliable from the jury pool?
Living in SoCal, I remember this incident well, my immediate thought was empathy and sympathy for the SWAT officer who killed this child – her father was using her as a human shield for christ’s sake!
But now, upon reading this “behind the scenes” story, I no longer feel anything but disgust at LAPD’s strong-armed attempts to dissolve themselves of any culpability and I could care less about any particular SWAT officer’s lingering guilt over it. I hope it hurts bad.
I see a job opening for Dr. Steven Hayne in SoCal
What ever happened to “identify your target?! I am worried that the people who shoot through doors and walls are just asking for trouble! It is my understanding the SWAT team returned fire when the father started shooting through the wall at them! How in the world could they avoid shooting the child, when they returned fire? They could not see the child. So how could they avoid hitting it, with gunfire! I guess they could have stood back until the guy emptied his gun! The likelihood of them being hit, unless they were standing in front of the door, was very small.
But,they are supposed to be a trained SWAT team! They should know about this type of scenario, beforehand. Shouldn’t they?