STRENGTHENING LAPD'S WATCHDOG

The LAPD Rampart scandal won't end neatly--assuming at some point it
will end--when the last bad cop in this case is fired or prosecuted or
when the last victim of a dirty prosecution is freed from jail. In the
future, there must be regular internal and outside monitoring efforts
to fix the flaws that allowed various forms of police misconduct to
flourish. That will mean biannual or even quarterly progress reports
that will be released to city officials and to the public.

There is already a model for this in the continuing public reports by
special counsel Merrick Bobb on reforms in the Los Angeles Sheriff's
Department, done without much objection from Sheriff Leroy D. Baca or
his predecessor, Sherman Block.

Proof of the need for significant changes is all around us. So far, at
least 30 LAPD officers, including four sergeants, have been relieved
of duty, suspended, fired or have quit in connection with the
department's ongoing probe. At least 67 criminal convictions have been
overturned. Some 70 officers are under investigation for committing
crimes, for misconduct or for covering up such activities.
Investigators are seeking evidence of a criminal conspiracy in the
LAPD.

But it's also clear that many others beyond the LAPD are tainted.
Falsely brought criminal cases backed by perjured testimony and
planted evidence do not proceed so smoothly to conviction without a
degree of shoddy work on the part of defense attorneys, prosecutors
and judges in rolling those cases through the criminal justice process.

That's why a proposal for legislative hearings on the criminal justice
system here and across the state is a good idea, as long as it doesn't
turn into the typical stage for political grandstanding. Los Angeles
County Public Defender Michael P. Judge wants a "comprehensive
independent assessment" of the county's criminal justice system.
That's fine, as long as it takes into account public defenders who
tell clients that it's no use challenging the police and the
prosecutors.

Yet that won't illuminate special problems, such as those faced by the
Police Commission's inspector general, Jeffrey Eglash.

One former federal government official described Eglash's powers and
resources as "comically inadequate . . . for the job he needs to do."
Another source pointed out that Eglash's ability to review police
investigations amounts to little more than "professional hindsight."

Eglash is aware of his position. "I have no fixed term of office, no
Civil Service protection, and I have to count votes every morning,"
Eglash said recently. "If I take on unpopular tasks, I have to worry
about my job protection."

The five-member Police Commission, appointed by the mayor, oversees
the LAPD and has set up an independent panel on Rampart. One of its
eight working groups will focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the
Police Commission and also on the role of its inspector general.
Strengthening the inspector general position even beyond the new City
Charter protections may be a most important recommendation. There are
no guarantees against future corruption. But the inspector general is
in the best position to understand the internal needs of the
department while never forgetting that it is the public's interest
that must guide him in monitoring the LAPD.