EDITORIAL LIFT THE LAPD VEIL SECRECY DOESN'T SERVE THE PUBLIC - OR THE POLICE.

ANY lingering doubts about the benefit of complete transparency in the Los Angeles Police Department should be put to rest by the actions of Officer Stephen Garcia on Friday.

Garcia was the officer who shot 13-year-old Devin Brown to death in a middle-of-the-night 2005 confrontation with the teen, who had stolen a car and appeared to be trying to back it over Garcia.

Last week, after an exhaustive and costly investigation, a Board of Rights panel found the shooting within LAPD policy and cleared Garcia, although the Police Commission had previously ruled the other way.

That should have been a big relief for the officer, allowing him to jump back into the business of police work with a clear mind.

Instead, because of a relatively new and ill-conceived policy of secret hearings, he was being vilified once again by some people. Just what was going on here, they wanted to know.

Garcia made the smartest move he could on Friday by posting the transcripts of the ``rationale'' -- the 19-page document of the board's reasons and conclusion about the details of the shooting -- online for the world to view.

The documents offer a more thorough accounting of the shooting and provide insight into the board's conclusion. Because of this, Garcia may get relief after all. What this incident illustrates is something that government at every level regularly forgets: Transparency engenders public trust and support, while secrecy only breeds mistrust.

There was no good reason to hide the Garcia proceedings from the public, and it was only done because of a recent change in policy. Fortunately, Police Chief William Bratton and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa recognize that and are supporting an end to the secrecy.

But that doesn't mean the secrecy policy will change.

The hearings were closed last year based on an opinion by City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo. Delgadillo points to an overly broad interpretation of a state Supreme Court ruling regarding the release of records in a San Diego disciplinary case. But to use this precedent as a basis to close the LAPD's hearings on the use of deadly force was an extreme overreaction and not in the best interest of the public or the LAPD.

Garcia's decision discredits the arguments of those -- including his police union -- who are fighting to keep Board of Rights proceedings secret.

It's too bad the L.A. Police Protective League doesn't recognize that secrecy only hurts its members. If its officers aren't doing anything wrong, then the scrutiny of the public will lend them better credibility and improve relations in the community. There's no better way to make officers safer on the street than by having the millions of upstanding citizens on their side.

Whether it takes state legislation or a policy reversal by the Police Commission, the city must lift up the veil around the LAPD. It will never be able to fulfill its promise to protect and serve if it does not.