Dropped cases against LA protesters reveal false claims from federal agents
Source: The Guardian
Mon 28 Jul 2025 07.00 EDT
Last modified on Mon 28 Jul 2025 09.19 EDT
US immigration officers made false and misleading statements in their reports about several Los Angeles protesters they arrested during the massive demonstrations that rocked the city in June, according to federal law enforcement files obtained by the Guardian.
The officers testimony was cited in at least five cases filed by the US Department of Justice amid the unrest. The justice department has charged at least 26 people with assaulting and impeding federal officers and other crimes during the protests over immigration raids. Prosecutors, however, have since been forced to dismiss at least eight of those felonies, many of them which relied on officers inaccurate reports, court records show.
The justice department has also dismissed at least three felony assault cases it brought against Angelenos accused of interfering with arrests during recent immigration raids, the documents show.
The rapid felony dismissals are a major embarrassment for the Trump-appointed US attorney for southern California, Bill Essayli, and appeared to be the result of an unusual series of missteps by the justice department, former federal prosecutors said.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/28/doj-la-protesters-false-claims
From the excerpt -
There was nothing "unusual" and there were no "missteps". This form of corrupt malicious prosecution is a "feature" NOT a "bug" because it was all "for show" in order to instill fear (and they know their bended-knee captive media won't follow up on what REALLY happened).

BOSSHOG
(43,454 posts)BumRushDaShow
(157,375 posts)
Scott Alan Swaggerty
(80 posts)HariSeldon
(526 posts)I mean, you don't really expect the orange one's US Attorney to prosecute people in his department or himself, right? So how do we get to a court-appointed prosecutor?
Hekate
(98,697 posts)Thank God for cell phone cameras. Of course, those get impounded, too.
moniss
(7,767 posts)'50's and '60's against protesters. Claim they were doing things they weren't and lock them up. No cell phones at that time to help out. It wouldn't matter how many witnesses you had. They would just claim the witnesses were wrong. It really used to get bad for some protesters once the cops got you in the station. Security cameras and such just weren't around like today. You might go in looking OK but you might come out not feeling too well.
ihaveaquestion
(3,879 posts)If so, isn't that ammunition which can be used in lawsuits against those officers?
Hopefully this is the case and they will have to face those they falsely accused in court.
BumRushDaShow
(157,375 posts)but there would need to be lawyers ready to do it (I expect many protestors don't have the money to pay a lawyer so the pro-bono ones from various orgs would need represent them).
EuterpeThelo
(68 posts)in the local news here in L.A. that grand juries are refusing to indict many of the protestors being charged! Don't recall where I saw it but will post a link if I run across it again because it made me proud to be an Angeleno.
BumRushDaShow
(157,375 posts)E.g., - https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220509035
The LA Times had an article - https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-07-23/protester-charges-essayli
azureblue
(2,503 posts)lie, that is, because they know the person they lie about will have to pay for a lawyer, take time off of work, maybe lose their job, worry about getting convicted anyway, etc.
And cops joke about it - they can use the system to punish anyone, guilty or not. And they will not get any blowback, either. They respond with cop jargon and "by the book" - "I feared for my life", etc.
The solution is to make the lying cop pay out of their own pocket. And put their names on the Brady (?) list - the list that stops them from getting re- hired as cops.
melm00se
(5,116 posts)sworn and signed?
that would make false statements subject to perjury if someone has the balls to file the charge.