The LAPD Waited How Long to Suspend 2 Cops Repeatedly Accused of Sexual Assault?!

A new lawsuit alleges that the Los Angeles Police Department tried to bury troubling allegations against its officers.

Panoramic/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The Los Angeles Police Department attempted to bury a case of sexual assault involving two of its officers, even telling the victim not to seek legal counsel after she came forward, according to a recent lawsuit filed in a California federal court. The suit alleges that the officers were reported for sexual assault by at least three other women between 2009 and 2012, but they remained on the job until 2013.

In September 2009, Tara McMahon, then 20, was arrested on drug charges by LAPD narcotics officers Luis Valenzuela and James Nichols; in the following months, she alleges in a legal complaint that was filed in late March, the two officers continued to contact and harass her. Toward the end of the year, McMahon says she was walking her dog in Hollywood when Valenzuela and Nichols pulled up beside her and ordered her inside their car. Valenzuela then drove to a secluded spot, and forced McMahon to perform oral sex on him in the back of the car while Nichols sat in the front seat, the complaint alleges. “If you don’t suck my dick, you’re going to jail,” Valenzuela told McMahon, according to a search warrant filed by an investigator involved in an ongoing LA County criminal investigation of the men. The officers threatened McMahon with jail if she told anyone about the incident, according to the complaint. McMahon alleges that the officers also tried to buy her a ticket to Las Vegas, if she promised not to come back to LA.

When McMahon reported the incident to the LAPD in January 2011, the suit alleges that “she was stonewalled and strung along for nearly three years by an LAPD Internal Affairs detective who mixed false promises that the officers would be brought to justice with a repeated command: Don’t talk to a lawyer.” The complaint continues, “[Internal Affairs was] only interested in keeping her quiet and burying the case.”

Fatima Goss Graves, a vice president at the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), says McMahon’s allegations are “shocking. An allegation of this level about this sort of brutality and assault…is something that should prompt an immediate investigation…Circling wagons and closing in is not the right approach.”

Because the LAPD failed to take disciplinary action against Valenzuela and Nichols immediately after McMahon reported the incident, the two officers were allegedly able to sexually assault at least one other woman, according to the LA County search warrant. Between 2009 and 2012, a total of four women reported they had been sexually assaulted by Valenzuela and/or Nichols, the complaint says. (In January, the city of Los Angeles agreed to pay one of the alleged victims $575,000 to settle her suit against the city.) Finally, in January 2013, the two men were suspended with pay as the department investigated. Nichols’ lawyer, Robert Rico, says his client denies McMahon’s allegations. Valenzuela did not respond to a request for comment. 

Valenzuela and Nichols are currently on unpaid suspension as they await the results of a disciplinary hearing. LAPD officials have determined that there is sufficient evidence to fire them, sources told the Los Angeles Times in November, but since the chief of police does not have the authority to fire an officer, a department disciplinary panel will decide their fate. The district attorney’s office says it is reviewing the case to decide whether to file criminal charges against them.

The sexual-assault allegations against the two officers could point to a more systemic problem within the LAPD, according to Goss Graves. “Having knowledge about even one [sexual-assault] case…in a police department should raise real alarm about whether there’s a broader…abuse of authority within the department,” she says, adding that an independent investigator should be brought in to make that determination. The LAPD declined to comment, as did he office of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.

In recent months, other police departments around the country have faced sexual-assault allegations. In mid-March, a police officer in Baltimore was charged with raping a woman he was supposed to be helping after a traffic accident. Around the same time, police officers in Detroit and San Jose, California, were both separately charged with raping women who had called 911 during domestic-violence incidents.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate