COMPLAIN TO LAPD, GET SUED; OFFICERS TAKE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST RESIDENTS' CLAIMS.

Byline: Phillip W. Browne Staff Writer

With misconduct complaints against the LAPD soaring, an unprecedented number of officers have fought back by suing residents over what they claim are unfounded and malicious accusations.

Officers, with their union's backing, say the defamation lawsuits came in response to Chief Bernard C. Parks' tougher discipline policy, which now requires all complaints against officers to be investigated and logged.

Since the policy began last year, complaints against officers have jumped about 300 percent, police said. Over the past two years, officers filed at least 23 lawsuits against private citizens and won 20, according to the union.

``We are very careful with the cases we choose to pursue because this could have a chilling effect on people who want to make complaints against police,'' said Detective Gary Fullerton, spokesman for the Los Angeles Police Protective League.

The Los Angeles Police Department's top spokesman, Cmdr. David Kalish, said he's not sure the jump in lawsuits is a result of the policy, but that officers have a right to sue over unfounded complaints.

``If they are malicious, intended to harm their career or reputation, citizens should be aware that officers have legal recourse,'' Kalish said.

Among those sued was Bavnahben Patel, a Studio City motel owner who a North Hollywood officer accused of filing a malicious complaint. He sued her for $5,000 after the LAPD found him innocent of misconduct.

``I cannot believe the police can do this. It disrupted the peace in my life,'' Patel said.

Officer John Smith lost the case but said the lawsuits are a ``last line of defense'' against Parks' policy.

``Now there are piles of complaints filling up personnel files, and a lot of them are just ridiculous,'' said Smith. ``Some citizens are maliciously trying to redirect attention from their wrongdoing to officers, and the department is letting them.''

The ACLU said the 17-year-old law allowing officers to sue for defamation is ``outrageous and wrong.''

``This law gives officers special rights to sue. It's unconstitutional and should be struck down,'' said Dan Tokaji of the Southern California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Defending reputations

Although the police and the union do not tally such lawsuits, Fullerton said the union has endorsed 23 and about a dozen pending cases, including four in the LAPD's North Hollywood Division and two in the West Valley Division.

The lawsuits were filed under a law that allows peace officers to sue people who make knowingly false complaints made with ``malice, spite or hatred.''

Under Parks' policy, all complaints must be investigated - regardless of their plausibility. Previously, frivolous allegations were handled at the station and logged.

Officers said those complaints add up and can be career-damaging.

$300,000 judgment

In 1995, a defamation case involving LAPD narcotics Detective Richard Womack is believed to have inspired other officers to use this obscure law.

The lawsuit stemmed from a 1995 narcotics case in which Gary Dale Steward was convicted of selling methamphetamines. Steward's alibi witness told criminal defense attorney Susanne Greene that Womack had used methamphetamine with her and had sexual contact without consent, according to court documents.

When Greene saw Womack walk out of the courtroom with the witness, she feared he might try to coerce a change in testimony, according to Greene and court documents.

Greene yelled at Womack: ``You, Womack, sexually molested her and did drugs with her,'' according to court documents. About 50 people, including potential jurors, could have heard the remarks, court documents said.

``I was trying to protect my witness. I had nothing else in mind,'' Greene said.

The LAPD investigated Womack and removed him from narcotics investigations. No misconduct was found, prompting Womack to sue Greene for defamation. The Los Angeles jury awarded him $300,000.

``He was seriously harmed by these accusations and his career went into a tailspin,'' said Robert T. Scully, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations.

The case is under appeal.

``Officers really became educated after Womack, and they began using that education when they needed to fight back,'' Fullerton said.

One officer, two lawsuits

Since last year, Smith has filed two cases against residents. In 1998 he won $2,500 in small claims court from a man who falsely claimed Smith ``dragged him through the North Hollywood station beating and kicking him.''

Most recently, Smith lost the $5,000 small-claims case against Patel, the motel owner.

The dispute began after the City Attorney's Office said two Studio City motels were a ``public nuisance'' because of prostitution and drugs.

Smith began checking the motel registration book every night. Patel talked with Smith's supervisor because she believed it was harassment. She claims she never intended to file a complaint, but one was lodged under the new policy.

``I went to the police station to ask what I could do to stop police from coming so much, and they made me sign a paper and say which officer it was. I didn't even want to name him,'' Patel said.

The LAPD cleared Smith of harassment so he sued Patel.

Last week, a Van Nuys Municipal Court judge ruled against Smith, saying it was too difficult to prove malice.

``I'm disappointed, but at least the (motel owners) and the public now understand that we are going to fight back,'' Smith said.