That Time That Judge Issued That Bench Warrant for LAPD Chief Beck

We’re not against the police. We’re not against the police department, but we are against police who commit misconduct (and those who help cover it up).

 

Last week was a busy week for Angelenos.  With so much going on and the news media’s increasing inability to focus on more than one courtroom at the same time you might not have heard about the bench warrant that was issued for Los Angeles Police Chief Charles Lloyd Beck–but it happened just the same.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge David Herriford issued the bench warrant at the request of defense attorney Nana Gyamfi after Beck and the City Attorney’s office failed to show up in court in the trial of Luz Flores and Evan Bunch on Tuesday.  Both Flores and Bunch are charged with multiple counts of resisting arrest, battery on a peace officer and trespassing. This after they were arrested last year in the process of trying to speak with Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti at Mt. Carmel Recreational Center in South Los Angeles on the opening night of the Summer Night Lights program. These are also the same two individuals that both the Mayor and police chief were denied a restraining order against.

Now I don’t know about where you come from, but where I come if the head of the police department had a warrant of any kind issued for his or her arrest that is usually considered news.  The fact that the bench warrant was issued with a body attachment makes it that much newsier.

A bench warrant with a body attachment is just what it sounds like. It is in effect an order to go and seize a person and bring them to the judge that issued the attachment. So for just over 24 hours one of Chief Beck’s officers could have legally gone and done just that.

Well after I tweeted that a bench warrant was issued for Beck, the City Attorney’s office woke up quick fast and in a hurry and showed up at court Tuesday afternoon six deep trying to quash the subpoena.  The judge refused to do anything without a motion in front of him– much to the chagrin of the City Attorney’s office–and so that bench warrant stayed in effect until court resumed on Wednesday at 11:00 a.m.

Because I believe sharing is caring, I’ve posted a copy of the judge’s order for the bench warrant for Los Angeles Police Chief Charles Lloyd Beck for you to download, print and frame.  Because for one brief moment in time LAPD Chief Beck was officially wanted.  Now while most police officers I know are not allowed to have a warrant of any kind with their name on it—something tells me this whole incident will just get swept under the rug along with that stolen PAL money.

In closing, if a tree falls in the forest and the news media isn’t there to report on it, does it still make a sound.  Yes, yes it does.

Judge's Order for Bench Warrant for Charles Lloyd Beck

The Court of Public Opinion

  • Pingback: That Other Trial Happening Right Now in L.A.--Black Lives Matter Goes on Trial | Jasmyne Cannick()

  • nosh

    Jasmyne, I like your blog. But the minute orders indicate you are wrong — the bench warrant/body attachment was not issued and released, it was issued and HELD, both times, until the next calendar event. This is a routine procedure that maintains the court’s jurisdiction over the subpoenaed witness. Since it was held, no, any police officer could NOT have legally gone and seized chief Beck.

  • Well not according to the attorney who requested it.

  • nosh

    If that attorney is the private attorney Nana Gyamfi listed in the minute orders, then I fear for the defendant. Both entries clearly record that the warrants were HELD. Does she (or you) understand the important difference between a warrant that is issued and released (meaning it is active and in effect) and one that is issued and HELD (meaning it is NOT released at the time, not active and in effect, but retains jurisdiction by the court until the date it is held to). This is California Criminal Defense 1 level stuff…