October 1, 2000
Re "Suit Says Chief Blocked Early Rampart Probe," Sept. 27: Now we learn that Chief Bernard Parks stopped an early investigation of the Rampart scandal and destroyed the career of an elite detective. What was Parks trying to hide? Parks ought to resign immediately. If not, the City Council ought to make his ouster its primary objective. Parks is the problem, or at least one of the primary ones, at the LAPD. Los Angeles will have a decent police force only when Angelenos demand an end to the corruption and brutality that envelop the LAPD.
December 19, 1999
Re "Rampart Probe May Now Affect Over 3,000 Cases," Dec. 15: I think that, rather than using taxpayers' money to review numerous cases, the district attorney's office should only review additional cases based on requests from convicted felons. If a person behind bars feels that he was wrongfully convicted as a result of testimony by Rampart's officers, then the case should be reviewed. This would save the taxpayers money. Instead of helping Chief Bernard Parks to get rid of officers who do not "deserve to wear the badge," I think that the goals and objectives should be to examine the current LAPD policy and procedures and make and/or implement timely changes to prevent future police brutality and/or cover-ups.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
April 22, 1998
I find it appalling that Chief Bernard Parks would write that letter (April 17). As a former police officer in the L.A. area, I am here to state that it is a common practice to continue questioning after rights have been read. You just state in your report that the suspect spontaneously made statements. This is common practice which is passed down from the experienced officers to probationary officers. It's creative report writing and any police official reading this is doing so with a smirk on his face saying, "That's right."
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
November 17, 1998
Re "City's First Police Watchdog Resigns Post," Nov. 11: The only reason Katherine Mader resigned her position as inspector general of the LAPD is solely because of politics or, more correctly, political correctness. Chief Bernard Parks wants his way, no matter what the system of checks and balances or the Christopher Commission says, and if someone poses a threat to his fiefdom, well, they'll just have to go. The only way to put this in proper perspective is to ask yourself a simple question: What would the Police Commission do about the current flap if the chief of police was Daryl Gates instead of Parks?
July 29, 2001
Re "LAPD Tries to Lure Its Retirees Back to Work," July 24: I retired from the LAPD last March after 24 years of service. I left because I was angered at what my department had become and felt I had no options. The LAPD's problem in retention, and to a lesser degree in recruitment, stems not from a lack of quality people but from an adversarial management philosophy, draconian punishment and bosses who know little about effective management and nothing about leadership. They are, once again, attempting to apply Band-Aid treatment to a critically ill patient.
January 7, 2002
I am disgusted with Councilman Nate Holden's allegations that the grievances against Chief Bernard Parks aired by the rank and file of the LAPD "could very well be" based on racial animus (Dec. 29). This heinous allegation was made with no evidence to support it and is a slanderous attack on the representative body of close to 8,000 police officers. Racism and racial bias are serious issues, not some tool to be utilized, in the form of false accusations, for political, professional or personal gain.