LA DA Gascon Hit Again with Ethics Violation Allegations

Lightning rod Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon has yet again been accused of a serious ethical lapse.

At a recent press conference regarding the arrest of Carlos Medina for the murder of Auxiliary Bishop David O’Connell, Gascon stated Medina confessed to the crime, that he “admitted that he had done the killing.”

True or not, referencing an alleged confession in public outside of a courtroom setting is against long-standing DA’s office policy and a potential violation of the state Bar’s code which reads:

“A lawyer who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will (i) be disseminated by means of public communication and (ii) have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.”

In non-legalese, saying at a press conference that a suspect confessed essentially opens up an avenue of appeal if and when the suspect is convicted as the potential jury pool could have been tainted by the report of a confession.

“It’s a question of fairness for the defendant,” said Association of Deputy District Attorneys (ADDA) vice-president Eric Siddall, a deputy district attorney with 15 years’ experience in the office.  “We don’t know if it will be admissible, if it will be used in court but it will be out there.”

Siddall added that Gascon has an issue with “basic competence.” Regarding a case, Gascon once said “charge him with murder one!” a term that is, shall we say, no longer in vogue.  

“He runs the office like a TV show,” Siddall said. 

The ADDA – the prosecutor’s union – has described this most recent lapse as part of a pattern of improper conduct by Gascon while in office.

“Whether it be office policy, state bar rules of professional conduct, or civil service rules, Gascón continues to violate one rule after another,” said ADDA president Michele Hanisee.  “He is guided not by the law or ethics, but by ideology and politics.”

Attempts to reach Gascon’s office for comment were unsuccessful.

Gascon – who has already faced two different recall attempts – faces seventeen civil suits filed against him by deputy district attorneys (plus eleven more civil service suits) claiming he has retaliated against staff, forced staff to potentially violate ethical codes, and even break the law.

“Gascon testified under oath that the policies he implemented were all legal, notwithstanding the rulings of a Superior Court and California Court of Appeal that some of those policies violated the law and forced prosecutors to violate their ethical obligations if they followed them,” Hennessey said.

Siddall also questioned the actual dollar cost to the taxpayer Gascon’s purported mis-reign has rung up. He noted that Gascon has already had to settle one suit at a cost of more than $1 million and that the outside lawyers the County pay to defend Gascon must be “in the millions.” Siddall said attempts to find out exactly how much has been paid in lawyer fees has been unsuccessful.

If the second recall – which is winding its way through the courts, with proponents claiming the signature count to determine if it could go before the voters was tainted – does not make it, LA County voters will be able to pass judgement on Gascon and his “progressive” policies such as limiting cash bail, refusing the seek the death penalty, and lenient sentencing standards in November, 2024.