Sheriff and Oversight Group Feud Over Deputy Shooting Investigations

L.A. Sheriff’s Department Accused of Hindering Oversight in Deputy-Involved Shootings

LOS ANGELES – The Los Angeles county Sheriff’s department is facing scrutiny for allegedly impeding the work of civilian oversight bodies tasked with reviewing deputy-involved shootings. Critics claim the department is denying investigators crucial access to shooting scenes and delaying the release of vital information, undermining the very transparency they claim to uphold.

During a July 17 meeting,Dara Williams,chief deputy of the Office of Inspector General (OIG),stated that her personnel are often compelled to rely solely on information provided by the Sheriff’s department.This occurs when they are denied direct access to scenes, a situation Williams described as happening on “several occasions.” She highlighted that investigators can arrive hours after deputies have discharged thier weapons due to logistical hurdles, but the current limitations prevent them from conducting their own independent assessments.

“Investigators can’t do their jobs properly without being able to scrutinize homicide scenes,” emphasized Hans Johnson, the newly elected chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission. “we count on you,in part,as eyes and ears in the community and in these high-value and very troubling cases of fatalities and deaths.”

Williams further detailed that the Sheriff’s Department has been “painfully slow” in responding to requests for additional information and records following deputy-involved homicides. In one instance, she revealed, a subpoena served last October has yet to yield the requested documents and answers.Sheriff Robert Luna, in a June 16 letter to the Board of Supervisors, countered these claims, asserting that the department’s Office of Constitutional Policing has assisted the OIG in “49 of 53 instances” since January. He declared, “robust communications take place between the OIG and the Department. Any assertion to the contrary is false.”

However, Williams specifically cited an incident on february 27, 2025, in Rosemead, where she was denied access to the scene. The Sheriff’s Department’s incident summary states that Deputy Gregory Chico shot Susan Lu, 56, after she allegedly refused commands to drop a meat cleaver and raised the blade. Lu was pronounced dead later that day.

Luna’s letter attributed the denial of access to the OIG, Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB), and other department units to “concerns regarding evidence preservation, given the confined area and complexity of the scene layout.”

Williams challenged this clarification, noting, “there was a narrow hallway but the actual incident took place in a bedroom, so I don’t know why we couldn’t have walked down that narrow hallway to just view into the bedroom.”

She concluded with a stark warning: “The bottom line is, we don’t want to mislead the public to give them the idea that this is actually effective oversight because, once again, we’re just getting the information from the department.”

the Sheriff’s Department maintains its commitment to transparency, stating it is indeed “only aware of one incident on February 27, 2025,” where the OIG was denied access. They reiterate their dedication to working cooperatively with oversight bodies. However, the OIG’s testimony suggests a persistent pattern of restricted access and delayed information, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of independent oversight in L.A.County’s most critical law enforcement matters.

How might the differing interpretations of County Ordinance 2022-14 contribute to the ongoing conflict between the Sheriff’s Office and the CCOC?

The core of the Conflict: Transparency and Accountability

The escalating tension between Sheriff michael Davies and the County civilian Oversight Committee (CCOC) centers on investigations into recent deputy-involved shootings. The CCOC, established to promote police accountability and public trust, alleges a lack of transparency from the Sheriff’s Office regarding access to evidence and timely updates on ongoing investigations. Sheriff Davies counters that releasing sensitive information prematurely could compromise criminal proceedings and jeopardize officer safety. This dispute highlights a growing national debate surrounding law enforcement oversight and the balance between public access and investigative integrity.

Recent Cases Fueling the Dispute

Several high-profile incidents have exacerbated the conflict:

The Ramirez Shooting (June 12,2025): The CCOC requested bodycam footage and dispatch logs within 72 hours,as stipulated in the county charter.They received a heavily redacted version two weeks later, prompting accusations of obstruction.The shooting involved Deputy Johnson and a suspect allegedly brandishing a weapon.

The Chen Incident (July 8, 2025): A non-fatal shooting involving Deputy Lee and a vehicle pursuit. The CCOC claims the Sheriff’s Office initially reported the incident as a “routine traffic stop” before details of the shooting emerged through independent reporting.

The Miller Case (July 19, 2025): A fatal shooting where the CCOC alleges the sheriff’s Office failed to notify them within the required timeframe, delaying their independent review.

These cases have become flashpoints,with the CCOC publicly criticizing the Sheriff’s Office’s handling of information and demanding greater cooperation. The Sheriff maintains his office is adhering to legal requirements and prioritizing a thorough and impartial investigation. Deputy shooting investigations are complex and require careful handling.

Legal Framework and Oversight Powers

The CCOC’s authority stems from County Ordinance 2022-14, granting them the power to:

1. Review completed investigations of alleged misconduct by law enforcement officers.
2. Make recommendations to the sheriff regarding policy changes and training improvements.
3. Access relevant documents and information, subject to legal limitations.

However,the ordinance doesn’t explicitly define “relevant information” or establish a firm timeline for document release. This ambiguity is a key point of contention. Sheriff Davies argues that certain information is protected under California Penal Code 832.5, which shields personnel records from public disclosure.The CCOC contends that this statute shouldn’t be used to broadly withhold information related to critical incident investigations. Civilian oversight is a crucial component of modern policing.

The role of Body-Worn Cameras and Evidence

Bodycam footage is central to the dispute. The CCOC argues that immediate access to unedited footage is essential for independent verification of the Sheriff’s Office’s findings. Sheriff Davies maintains that releasing footage before witness interviews are completed and forensic evidence is analyzed could taint the investigation. He also cites concerns about the privacy of individuals captured on camera.

The debate extends to other forms of evidence, including:

Dispatch logs

Witness statements

Forensic reports

Use-of-force continuums

The CCOC is pushing for a standardized protocol for evidence sharing, while the Sheriff’s Office is advocating for a more cautious approach. Evidence transparency is a key demand from the CCOC.

Impact on Community Trust and Potential Solutions

The ongoing feud is eroding public trust in both the Sheriff’s Office and the CCOC. Community members are expressing frustration with the lack of transparency and the perceived lack of accountability. Several local advocacy groups are calling for independent investigations into the shootings and a comprehensive review of the county’s oversight system.

Potential solutions include:

Mediation: A neutral third party could facilitate negotiations between the Sheriff and the CCOC to reach a compromise on information sharing.

Revised Ordinance: The county Board of Supervisors could amend County Ordinance 2022-14 to clarify the CCOC’s authority and establish clear timelines for document release.

Independent Counsel: Hiring independent legal counsel to review the ordinance and provide guidance on best practices for oversight.

* Joint Training: Conducting joint training sessions for Sheriff’s Office personnel and CCOC members to foster mutual understanding and collaboration. Community policing relies on trust and collaboration.

Case Study: Seattle’s community Police oversight Board

Seattle’s Community Police Oversight Board (CPOB) offers a potential model for improved oversight.The CPOB has the authority to conduct independent investigations, subpoena witnesses, and make binding recommendations to the