PARKS TO BE INVESTIGATED IN STALKER CASE MEETING.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

Police Commission President Edith Perez sought on Wednesday to downplay questions about Chief Bernard C. Parks' intervention in a felony stalking case involving a police officer, but the LAPD's inspector general said she is pursuing the matter.

Responding to an article in the Daily News, Perez said her own review shows Parks did nothing wrong when he become involved in the case of the Los Angeles Police Department sergeant, who met with the chief at Parker Center despite a restraining order to keep away from his ex-girlfriend, a detective who works there. The sergeant pleaded guilty to felony stalking and faced possible dismissal from the LAPD, an issue that could be decided by Parks.

Perez denied Parks had come under a formal inquiry. But later in the day, Inspector General Katherine Mader issued a statement saying she will pursue the matter to determine whether the department took adequate steps to protect its employees.

``Several individuals have contacted the office of the inspector general regarding the possible failure of department members to protect the interests of all employees involved in this matter,'' Mader said. ``It is my duty to these complainants, as well as to the integrity of the office of the inspector general, to pursue the questions raised until they are satisfactorily answered.''

Parks was in Florida at a conference Wednesday and did not return calls.

Unaware of order

He said through a spokesman that he was unaware of the restraining order issued against South Bureau Traffic Division Sgt. Howard Irvin when he agreed to meet him at Parker Center.

LAPD records say Parks tried to block Irvin's arrest for violating the order but that a complaint was filed with the City Attorney's Office, which ruled the judge's order should be carried out.

Penny Harrington of the National Center for Women in Policing said Parks' actions raise questions about his judgment and are consistent with a report issued in July by the inspector general that found the LAPD is soft on and rarely arrests police officers accused of domestic violence.

``It does fit their pattern,'' Harrington said. ``What (Mader) found was that seldom were these police officers arrested.''

Perez said at a news conference that she concluded Parks did not act improperly after talking to the chief, Deputy Chief Martin Pomeroy, members of the City Attorney's Office and others during the previous 24 hours.

``I personally am satisfied at this point in time that there was no impropriety or misconduct on the part of Chief Parks or on the part of the department,'' she said.

One official in the City Attorney's Office said Perez's conclusion does not jibe with police reports that indicate Parks personally told an officer not to pursue charges that Irvin violated the restraining order by meeting with the chief.

In addition to questioning officials herself and obtaining all the police reports written about the incident, Perez said the Police Commission has asked Mader to gather additional facts about the incident.

Perez disputed characterizing the process of questioning LAPD officials as an inquiry or investigation.

Sources confirmed on Wednesday that Mader has been interviewing city officials about Parks' role in the Irvin incident.

Will gather facts

Police Commission spokesman Ken Ferber said Mader will continue to gather facts to answer the questions posed by the commission Tuesday.

Pomeroy said Parks did not know of the existence of a restraining order against Irvin at the time he met with him in August at Parker Center, the workplace of Irvin's ex-girlfriend, Detective Linda Compton, who had a court order barring Irvin from the building.

Representatives of the chief have said Parks felt it would be unfair to charge Irvin for violating the restraining order when Parks played a role in setting up the meeting so Irvin could be questioned by Internal Affairs Division detectives about a separate case officials declined to discuss.

``This is not a major matter in my view,'' Pomeroy said.

The chief's secretary and Irvin's defense representative told investigators that the sergeant asked for the meeting.

Pomeroy said there are alleged to be multiple victims of Irvin and that the sergeant will face an administrative hearing.

He said Parks asked him to look into the matter, and he decided that the judge should be told why Irvin was at Parker Center so the warrant could be quashed.

``I suggested to our investigating detective that they should hold off arresting our employee until such time as a judge could be notified of the facts of the case,'' Pomeroy said.

A police report obtained by the Daily News said Lt. J.B. Cruz was contacted by Parks at home after the judge issued the warrant against Irvin, and Parks ``advised me that he did not want the crime report regarding Howard Irvin's reported violations of a court order to be used as a criminal violation.''

Irvin, 39, a South Bureau Traffic Division sergeant with 15 years on the job, is on unpaid leave pending a disciplinary hearing at which he could be fired. He pleaded guilty June 30 to two felony counts of stalking and threatening Compton and two misdemeanor counts of violating a previous restraining order, according to a police report.

Compton complained to the inspector general and City Attorney's Office that Parks intervened over serving the warrant for violating the restraining order.

Compton said Tuesday that she was ``furious. I was scared. I think that Chief Parks has no right to do that. He's getting in the way of justice.''

No more interviews

Department officials said Wednesday that Compton would conduct no more interviews on the matter.

Harrington, the former chief of police in Portland, Ore., said that even if Parks invited Irvin to Parker Center without knowing about the restraining order, the chief should have allowed the warrant to be served once it was issued by the court because Irvin knew about the order when he went to police headquarters.

``I am amazed that the chief took that position,'' Harrington said. ``Regardless of whether the chief invited him in, if you know as a police officer that a crime has been committed and know that a warrant is out, your duty is to serve that warrant.''

Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg agreed that the warrant should have been served once it was issued by a judge.

``I don't think you should ever not serve a warrant - I'm sorry,'' Goldberg said. ``You go and explain (to the judge) why you think it's not appropriate, but I don't think you ever not serve a warrant.

``I'm a little surprised that, since that was a celebrated case, that no one informed the chief that this would put the department and him in an awkward situation. It's not like the meeting couldn't have been held elsewhere.''

CAPTION(S):

Photo

PHOTO (color) Edith Perez

Downplays Parks' role in case