Letters

THE CHIEF GETS OFF A GOOD ONE

DEAR EDITOR:

I would like to commend Charles Rappleye on his April 6–12 article about “Rampart Watch.” It is the first of his articles that I have read in which he generally reported the information and did not let his personal biases, flawed logic or opinions get in the way of the facts. Keep it up. Hopefully, it will become a trend!

The “fresh eyes” brought in by the new district attorney and his desire to fully cooperate with the U.S. Attorney and the FBI caused the Aguirre case, which was ready for prosecution six months to a year earlier, to finally be brought before the court system, and the Durden case to be brought to a conclusion.

I realize it is difficult for Mr. Rappleye to ever write an accurate article about the LAPD, but if he keeps using facts to support his story, he might finally get it!

Eventually, he will even come to the conclusion that the LAPD found the corruption, stopped it, and has been the primary agency that has pushed for and demanded criminal prosecutions of its own officers. He may have missed similar comments made by the assis.tant director of the FBI, Mr. James DeSarno, at a recent news conference.

I am sure it is not often Mr. Rappleye hears good comments about his work, so I felt obligated to express my opinion when I finally read a “good one.”

—Bernard C. Parks
Chief of Police, Los Angeles

BOXING MARSUPIALS

DEAR EDITOR:

Re: Charles Rappleye’s “The Square Cop” [April 13–19]. While Officer Armando Coronado may or may not be innocent of any wrongdoing, the Weekly’s apparent blind faith in the integrity of the LAPD Board of Rights exoneration of him is pitifully, astoundingly naive. What other group’s investigation of itself would be given any credence? (I hear the Mafia has investigated itself and found that this whole organized-crime thing is a hoax perpetrated on us by Hollywood and the FBI.) It is clearly in the LAPD’s best interest to characterize Ray Perez as a liar and the rest of the officers as victims of his horrible lies about them.

The only question left at the end of a Board of Rights hearing is: Do we actually get to see the
kangaroo?

—Gerald Williams
Pasadena

DEAR EDITOR:

The LAPD horrifies me. I am literally afraid of them, driving down the street, anywhere I see them. I’m so pleased and encouraged to see Charles Rappleye’s continuing, detailed stories declaring the truth and struggles a “good cop” like Armando Coronado goes through.

—L. Autry
Sherman Oaks

DID HE SAY BACK TO
FAIRNESS?

DEAR EDITOR:

This is in response to Harold Meyerson’s “Old and New” [Powerlines, April 13–19]. The subheadline reads, “Hahn and Villaraigosa square off for the mayoral finale,” and this is as close as Meyerson comes to a fair and neutral journalistic piece. As for the photographs of the two candidates, James Hahn is shown looking despondent and turning away from his supporters, while Antonio Villaraigosa is surrounded by microphones at a press conference, as if every word he is uttering is in need of being recorded.

The article itself is so slanted in favor of Villaraigosa — Meyerson could not have gone further out of his way to depict Hahn as Don Knotts at Sunday-afternoon tea, or emphasized more the fact that Hahn has a Southern California political legend for a father — it brings to mind a seesaw exercise between a sumo wrestler and a housefly. It reads like a campaign brochure for Villaraigosa, touting his relationship with labor and even making comparisons to Tom Bradley. What I find most interesting, though, is that when Meyerson writes about the dirty last few weeks of the primary election for mayor, he mentions the Morongo Indian campaign ad, but not its content: that Villaraigosa accepted money from the father of a drug dealer.

Finding such an article in the L.A. Weekly surprises me. I have looked to this free paper to keep me informed on important issues concerning Los Angeles. I have depended on it to be journalistically neutral and fair in its reporting. Meyerson’s article reads like a government-run political piece put out by some petty South American military dictatorship. It is awash in political partisanship. It is not journalism. It smells of a smear campaign against Jim Hahn. Is that the job of a “free” newspaper? Get it together, L.A. Weekly, in time for the June election. Get back to fairness.

—Kevin Hillman
Los Angeles

A MARVELOUS WORK AND A WONDER

DEAR EDITOR:

Harold Meyerson is obviously delighted that conservatism in general and Republicanism in â particular have been reduced to a state of irrelevancy here in Los Angeles. As one of the very few remaining conservative Republicans left in the City of Angels, I do find it regrettable that local politics is a sorrowful one-party spectacle dominated by competing Stalinist and Trotskyite factions of the Democratic Party. Observing national politics is a lot more fun: It is truly wonderful having a president who is sympathetic to taxpayers and who puts American interests first for a change. The election of George W. Bush is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.

—Geoffrey C. Church
Los Angeles

NOT AT ALL, ACTUALLY

DEAR EDITOR:

Re: Bill Bradley’s “Silent Reactor” [March 23–29]. Since the Weekly is so sharp on the California power crisis, why doesn’t it look in its own back yard, at the L.A. Department of Water and Power? The company made over $1 billion in profit from this power crisis by buying power from Bonneville Power Administration at a dirt-cheap price, then turning around and selling it at a highly marked-up price. How do you like that?

—G. Gwiazdowski
Carlsbad

THEY PUT THE “FISH” IN
FISH-FACED

DEAR EDITOR:

Re: your capsule review of the movie Memento [Current Releases]. Ella Taylor’s own words perhaps give a clue to what’s wrong with this movie: “Without Pearce’s taut, radiant presence . . .” Think about it. Would someone who has lost his memory look taut and radiant? I saw a TV show about some Canadians who had lost their short-term memories due to eating mussels caught in the wrong waters at the wrong time of year. They didn’t look radiant. They looked vacant, if I remember correctly.

—Johanna Perec
Los Angeles

HAVES AND HAVE-NOTS

DEAR EDITOR:

The article on Lars Frederiksen and the Bastards [“U.S. Pissed Office,” April 6–12] was bullshit. Lars has paid his dues and has the scars to prove it — unlike Green Day and Offspring, who sit in their expensive homes sipping champagne and writing songs about girls and wanting to be black. Lars’ new
album is straight to the point.

—James Magan
Portland, Oregon

DEAR EDITOR:

Andrew Lentz credits the song “To Have and To Have Not” to Lars Frederiksen, when in actuality it was written by Billy Bragg
in 1983.

—Strooltz
New York City

In Sandra Ross’ cover story article on Murray Mednick (“Rising From the Ashes,” April 20–26), Guy Zimmerman was miscredited with having directed for television, although he has on occasion written for that medium.

Advertising disclosure: We may receive compensation for some of the links in our stories. Thank you for supporting LA Weekly and our advertisers.