Should LAPD whistleblower face charges?

By Stephen Oduntan

Contributing Writer

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman is defending his decision to charge a Los Angeles police officer with 16 felonies for secretly recording colleagues who allegedly made racist, sexist and homophobic remarks, arguing that police officers entrusted with enforcing the law should themselves be held to a higher standard.

But the prosecution of Officer Daniel Flores has opened a wider debate over prosecutorial discretion and police accountability, with Mayor Karen Bass, legal scholars and civil rights advocates questioning whether felony charges against an officer who says he was documenting workplace misconduct could discourage others from coming forward.

Flores, 43, pleaded not guilty Aug. 10 to 16 felony counts of eavesdropping or recording confidential communications. He remains free on his own recognizance.

In an interview following Flores’ arraignment, Hochman said Flores’ status as a police officer was among the factors that weighed in favor of felony prosecution, arguing that the authority entrusted to law enforcement brings greater responsibility to obey the law.

Prosecutors say Flores made 122 recordings involving 16 people over several months in 2024 while assigned to the LAPD’s Recruitment and Employment Division.

“It’s not an accident, it’s not a mistake,” Hochman said, calling the recordings “a series of intentional acts.”

Hochman said his office exercised discretion by filing 16 felony counts — one for each person allegedly recorded — rather than potentially pursuing a charge for each recording.

Bass has criticized the prosecution, saying last week that although recording colleagues without their consent can be a crime, the charges “send the wrong message that calling out egregious behavior could land you in prison.”

Hochman rejected that argument, saying Flores could have documented the alleged remarks in writing and reported them to LAPD Internal Affairs or the independent Office of Inspector General.

“I actually want to chill and deter anyone engaging in illegal conduct to accomplish their purpose,” Hochman said. “We’re not going to allow police officers to go ahead and commit crimes to build evidence in their cases.”

Flores’ attorney, Alan Jackson, disputes Hochman’s contention that Flores bypassed lawful reporting channels and challenges a central premise of the prosecution — that the recordings constituted a crime at all.

Jackson said Flores reported the alleged misconduct to both Internal Affairs and the Inspector General — the channels Hochman cited — and initially submitted the recordings anonymously. He said Flores could not simply report the conduct to his supervisors because supervisors themselves were among those recorded.

“To suggest that Mr. Flores did not seek to report this offensive and inappropriate conduct through the proper channels is not true,” Jackson said.

The defense also disputes whether the conversations qualified as confidential under California’s eavesdropping law. Jackson said they occurred in an open-office bullpen with numerous employees present and said LAPD investigators concluded in their report that there was no expectation of privacy there.

“This prosecution is factually and legally meritless,” Jackson said. “It’s pure retaliation.”

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law and a constitutional law scholar, said the circumstances surrounding a conversation matter in determining whether it is confidential.

“If I’m talking to you on an airplane, a crowded terminal or having a conversation in a hallway with a lot of students, that’s not a confidential communication,” Chemerinsky said.

He said there is nevertheless an argument that Flores violated California law, but distinguished that question from prosecutors’ discretion over whether and how severely to charge an offense.

Because violations can be prosecuted as misdemeanors or felonies, Chemerinsky questioned the severity of the charges.

“Why the D.A. wants to charge this as 16 felony counts is what I find so disturbing,” he said.

Hochman also questioned Flores’ motives for making the recordings, saying evidence shows Flores spoke about winning the “LAPD lottery” through litigation, did not want to return to patrol and wanted to become a stay-at-home father. Hochman said those allegations are detailed in a prosecution court filing and that supporting evidence will emerge as the case proceeds.

Jackson called that characterization a “smear” and said Flores’ anonymous submission of the recordings contradicts claims that he was attempting to monetize his complaint. He said Flores sought legal counsel only after LAPD pursued discipline against him.

Los Angeles civil rights attorney Carl Douglas said Flores’ motivations should be separated from whether criminal prosecution is warranted.

“He may not be a perfect plaintiff,” Douglas said. “His lawsuit will decide that fact.”

After being told of Hochman’s argument that Flores’ status as an officer and the repeated nature of the recordings justified felony treatment, Douglas said it did not alter his view.

“The prosecution still has a chilling effect,” Douglas said. “He’s not being charged with making up the recorded words on the tapes.”

The recordings document what Flores alleges he encountered after transferring to LAPD’s Recruitment and Employment Division in 2021.

In a lawsuit filed against the city in June, Flores alleges employees made derogatory comments about Black people, women, Latinos, Asians and LGBT people. The lawsuit alleges Black people were referred to as monkeys, women were disparaged and employees used homophobic language to describe colleagues. Flores also alleges his supervisor made a derogatory comment about former Dodgers pitcher Fernando Valenzuela following his death.

Hochman called the alleged remarks “deplorable” and said those responsible should be held accountable, but stressed that racist, sexist or homophobic comments are not themselves crimes his office can prosecute. Workplace discipline, he said, is LAPD’s responsibility.

At least five members of the unit were previously assigned home pending an Internal Affairs investigation, but the ultimate disciplinary outcome has not been publicly disclosed.

Melina Abdullah, a Cal State L.A. professor and co-director of Black Lives Matter Grassroots, said, accountability for those employees should be part of the public discussion.

“More than disclose, there should be repercussions,” Abdullah said.

She argues Flores should not be prosecuted at all, calling the case an attempt to discourage officers from breaking the “blue wall of silence.”

The location of the alleged conduct also raises broader questions because the Recruitment and Employment Division is involved in bringing prospective officers into LAPD.

Abdullah said she worries that attitudes within the unit could influence who is recruited into the department.

“They’re looking for people who are like them — racist, sexist and homophobic,” Abdullah said. “And so what does that mean in terms of the way that our city is actually policed?”

After the recordings became known, LAPD launched an internal review examining whether applicants from protected classes had been disqualified during the period in question, according to a May 2025 Internal Affairs email previously obtained by the Los Angeles Times. Investigators sought information about why applicants were rejected and whether any decisions were later overturned.

The findings of that review have not been publicly disclosed.

The consequences facing Flores are clear: 16 felony charges and an ongoing criminal prosecution. Less clear are the consequences, if any, for the employees whose alleged remarks prompted the recordings — and what LAPD ultimately found when it examined whether applicants from protected groups had been disqualified from joining the department.

Flores returns to court Sept. 9.

Stephen Oduntan is a freelance writer for Wave Newspapers.

CAPTION

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman has come under fire for charging a Los Angeles police officer with 16 counts of eavesdropping or recording confidential communications. Officer Daniel Flores said he recorded colleagues who allegedly made racist, sexist and homophobic remarks.

Courtesy photo

JUMPHEAD

LAPD officer faces charges for secretly recording colleagues