Friday, April 14th 2023

"Only one tribunal ever adopted a practice of forcing counsel upon an unwilling defendant in a criminal proceeding. The tribunal was the Star Chamber."-U.S. v Faretta , 422 U.S. 806 (1975)

OUTSIDE, IT'S AMERICA

REASONABLE DOUBT

"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(c) 1995-2026

All Rights Reserved

LAPD undercover officers file claims against city, department over data release.

More than 300 Los Angeles Police Department undercover officers whose personal information was released and posted on various websites announced on Tuesday, April 4, the filing of claims against the city and LAPD leadership.

“This presents a significant threat to the safety of the citizens of Los Angeles,” attorney Matthew McNicholas told reporters at a Westwood news conference announcing the claims, which are often precursors to lawsuits. “I can tell you without (revealing) detail that several undercover operations have had to stop and several undercover (officers) have been threatened with direct threat based on this release, requiring them and their families to move,” he said. The claims allege violations including breach of contract, legal malpractice, violation of right to privacy. The claims were filed on behalf of 321 undercover officers whose personal information was released, the lawyer said.

The LAPD released the pictures, names, work locations and other information of some 9,000 officers following a California Public Records Act request filed by the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition. That included officers who work in sensitive and undercover operations — a release the department later called a mistake and prompted an apology from Chief Michel Moore. The Stop LAPD Spying Coalition launched Watch the Watchers, a website that publishes head shots and other information related to sworn personnel to hold them accountable. Another website, according to a lawsuit filed by the Los Angeles Police Protective League, took information from that website and listed bounties for officers. That second site is now inactive.

Suspicion that viewpoint discrimination is afoot is at its zenith when the speech restricted is speech critical of the government," Ridley v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., 390 F.3d 65, 86 (1st Cir. 2004)

CONTACT

COLLECT A BOUNTY

COLLECT A REWARD

FILE A COMPLAINT

TO PURCHASE KILLERCOP.COM™ CLICK HERE

(c) 1995-2026

All Rights Reserved