LAPD undergoes first major leadership shake-up with McDonnell as chief
Faced with ongoing struggles to woo new recruits and uncertainty around his plans to overhaul the LAPD, McDonnell gave the first indications about how he intends to reorganize by elevating three deputy chiefs — Emada Tingirides, Michael Rimkunas and Scott Harrelson — to top positions and resurrecting a long-dormant bureau.
The moves were announced in a departmentwide email last week but aren't expected to take effect until later this month.
Tingirides, who lost out to McDonnell in a bid to become chief last fall, becomes assistant chief in charge of the Office of Operations, which oversees patrol functions. She was recently announced as a finalist for the same job in Fort Worth, according to local news reports. Her recent promotion is seen by some inside the department as a move to convince her to stay. She becomes the highest-ranking Black woman in the department's history.
Harrelson will now be in charge of the department's training and recruitment efforts as the head of the Office of Support Services, replacing Assistant Chief Daniel Randolph, who is expected to retire in the coming weeks.
Filling out McDonnell's inner circle are two other holdovers from the administration of former Chief Michel Moore: Rimkunas and Dominic Choi, who served as interim chief until McDonnell took over in November. Choi remained an assistant chief but was named McDonnell's chief of staff — in effect the department's No. 2.
The head of the bureau that includes internal affairs, Rimkunas will now run the Office of Special Operations.
McDonnell also resurrected the department's Human Resources Bureau, which was shut down in 2004 when McDonnell he was a senior official under former Chief William J. Bratton. He didn't immediately say what the new bureau's responsibilities will be.
It's unclear whether McDonnell will have to submit parts of his reorganization plan to the City Council, which in the past has had to sign off on changes to the department's structure.
When he took the job last year, McDonnell initially said he wanted to spend at least three months studying the LAPD to understand how it had changed since he came up through the ranks. He left in 2010 to become the top cop in Long Beach, then served a term as L.A. County sheriff. His early review timeline was thrown off, he told reporters at a news conference last week, because of the fires in January and the recent protests over federal immigration raids.
The series of major incidents, McDonnell said, presented an unexpected opportunity to evaluate his senior staff to see how they performed 'in crisis mode.'
The chief added that he had delayed his realignment for the 'outcome of the budget to see where we were' and the completion of a monthslong study of the department by Rand Corp., a global policy think tank brought in last year to conduct a top-down review. The study was recently finished, and McDonnell said he was reviewing its recommendations, as well as those made by the numerous internal working groups he had convened to look at recruitment, discipline and other workplace issues.
Without offering details, McDonnell hinted that another one of his priorities will be beefing up the department's detective ranks and overhauling the system that handles misconduct complaints against officers, long a source of controversy and frustration.
'I have in rough form what I think it could look like, but I certainly want to get the input from those who are dealing with it on a day-to-day basis on how do we best deal with the nuances of doing the job today with the number of resources that we have,' he told reporters.
McDonnell has come under growing pressure from critics who have said he is moving too slowly to make changes, with more urgency required as the city gets ready to host events such as the next year's World Cup and the 2028 Olympic Games.
In other personnel moves announced last week, McDonnell moved Deputy Chief Marc Reina from the Training Bureau to South Bureau, where he previously worked as captain, and promoted German Hurtado, the department's immigration coordinator, to deputy chief over Central Bureau, which has been the epicenter of recent protests.
Hurtado has been named in at least two pending lawsuits by LAPD officials accusing him of covering up unjustified uses of force by officers during the 2020 protests. The city has denied wrongdoing and is fighting the cases in court.
'As far as I know, I'm only named as a witness in those cases, and I'm not at liberty to talk about ongoing lawsuits,' Hurtado said when reached Monday by The Times.
McDonnell also demoted Assistant Chief Blake Chow to his civil service rank of commander — a similar trajectory to McDonnell, who was made to drop a rank during the tenure of former Chief Charlie Beck. Capt. Ray Valois, who helped oversee the department's response to the Palisades fire, was elevated to commander in the Valley Bureau.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Precinct DTLA, well-known gay bar, warns it could close after former employee claims discrimination
A downtown Los Angeles bar known as a haven for the gay community is warning it could soon shutter as it faces a costly legal fight with a former employee. 'We're a couple of slow weekends away from having to close our doors,' owners of Precinct DTLA wrote Friday on Instagram. 'Like many small businesses, we've taken hit after hit — from COVID shutdowns and ICE raids to citywide curfews and the ongoing decline of nightlife. But what we're facing now is even more devastating.' In May, Jessica Gonzales sued the bar, its owner, manager and an employee, alleging she faced discrimination and harassment as a cisgender, heterosexual woman and was subjected to an unsafe work environment. Gonzales, who worked at the bar on Broadway for eight years, claimed that when she reported employees and patrons were having sex in the bar, its owner told her to 'stop complaining.' According to a complaint filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Gonzales was required to work the coat check for Precinct DTLA's weekly 'jockstrap / underwear party' without receiving pay. She said the bar's manager eliminated the coat check fee, believing it would 'incentivize more patrons to drop their pants.' Gonzales claimed the environment grew so hostile she needed to bring stress balls to work. One day, her complaint said, another employee grabbed her stress ball and refused to give it back to her. In a struggle over the stress ball, Gonzales claims the employee broke two of her fingers. According to her lawsuit, Gonzales was effectively fired after the incident, in part because Precinct DTLA's owner and manager wanted to replace her with a gay male employee. 'These claims are completely false,' the bar's representatives wrote on Instagram. In the post, they added that the lawyer representing Gonzales 'appears to have a clear anti-LGBTQ agenda.' 'There are multiple reports — including from individuals who previously worked with him — that he used anti-LGBTQ slurs in written emails while at his former firm,' they wrote on Instagram. Gonzales is represented by John Barber, court records show. The Times reported in 2023 that Barber and his colleague, Jeff Ranen, regularly denigrated Black, Jewish, Middle Eastern, Asian and gay people in emails they exchanged while partners at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith. After Barber and Ranen left to start their own firm, Lewis Brisbois released scores of the lawyer's emails, which showed the men regularly used anti-gay slurs to refer to people, The Times reported. In a joint statement at the time, Barber and Ranen said they were 'ashamed' and 'deeply sorry.' Barber didn't immediately return a request for comment Saturday. In the Instagram post, Precinct DTLA's representatives said defending themselves from Gonzales' allegations was 'draining us emotionally and financially.' 'Come to the bar,' they wrote. 'Buy a drink. Order some food. Tip the staff. Show up.'
USA Today
6 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump addresses pardon decision for Sean 'Diddy' Combs, but questions remain
President Donald Trump is breaking his silence on pardoning Sean "Diddy" Combs for the first time since he was acquitted of the most serious charges in a federal sex-crimes trial last month. In an interview that aired Friday, Aug. 1 on Newsmax with host Rob Finnerty, Trump discussed the possibility of presidential pardons for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, Combs and former Rep. George Santos. After Finnerty asked, "Sean 'Diddy' Combs. Would you consider pardoning him?" Trump responded: "Well he was essentially, I guess sort of, half-innocent. I don't know what they do, he's still in jail or something. He was celebrating a victory but I guess it wasn't as good of a victory." Trump 'should not pardon' Sean 'Diddy' 'Diddy' Combs, Megyn Kelly says On July 2, jurors found Combs not guilty of racketeering and sex trafficking ex-girlfriends Casandra "Cassie" Ventura Fine and a woman known as "Jane" in his sweeping trial that nearly lasted two months. He was convicted July 2 on two of the five counts against him for transporting those same women for prostitution, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years per count. During the interview, Trump said "probably..." before pausing and revealing to Finnerty, "You know, I was very friendly with him, I got along with him great, seemed like a nice guy. I didn't know him well, but when I ran for office he was very hostile." The Newsmax host noted then that "he said some not so nice things about you, sir." "Yeah, and it's hard. You know, like you, we're human beings and we don't like to have things cloud our judgement, right?" the president continued. "But when you knew someone and you were fine and then you run for office and he made some terrible statements… so I don't know... it makes it more difficult to do." Then, Trump replied, "I'd say so," when Finnerty clarified by asking if it was "more likely a no for (pardoning) Combs?" In the interview, Trump was seemingly referencing Combs' expletive-filled 2017 comments in The Daily Beast, essentially saying that "(Black people) don't really" care about Trump. "The tomfoolery that's going on in D.C., that's just regular everyday business to Black folks," Combs told the left-leaning outlet in-part, adding later in the interview that he had to "keep it focused on that self-love that we need to give our race." Trump first weighed in on the possibility of pardoning Combs on May 30 in the Oval Office. "Nobody's asked" about a pardon, the president said. "But I know people are thinking about it. I know they're thinking about it. I think some people have been very close to asking." Trump added, "I haven't spoken to him in years. He really liked me a lot." Despite last month's verdict, Combs' legal saga continues. On Wednesday, July 31, lawyers for Combs requested his acquittal, or a new trial altogether, in court documents reviewed by USA TODAY. A day earlier, conservative host Megyn Kelly urged Trump against potentially pardoning Combs. Kelly said in an X post on July 30 that "Trump should not pardon Diddy" because "he doesn't deserve it." "He's a Trump hater. He's a woman abuser. MAGA is already upset over elites seeming to cover for each other. This would not help. GOP struggling w/young female voters, most of whom will HATE a Diddy pardon," Kelly wrote. Contributing: Taijuan Moorman
NBC Sports
6 hours ago
- NBC Sports
Tony Buzbee responds to Shannon Sharpe's claim that he targets Black men
Anyone who has been following the NFL since 2021 knows the name Tony Buzbee. He arrived on the scene as the lawyer representing the first plaintiff who sued then-Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson for misconduct during massage-therapy sessions. Eventually, Buzbee represented more than 20 plaintiffs against Watson. Most recently, Buzbee settled a lawsuit on behalf of a woman who claimed that Hall of Fame tight end Shannon Sharpe committed sexual assault. After the lawsuit was filed in April, Sharpe attacked Buzbee personally, claiming among other things that he 'targets Black men.' In a new Esquire profile, Buzbee responded to that claim. 'I didn't wake up one morning and say, 'I want to sue Shannon Sharpe.' He has no relevance in my life,' Buzbee said, via Sean Keeley of 'I actually think he's very entertaining when he yells and screams and talks about sports that he's not involved in. But if I think it's a legitimate case, then I pursue it. And I think this is worth my time.' Buzbee's business model, if he's doing it properly (and the results would suggest he is), doesn't discriminate. He told Esquire that he receives as a fee roughly 40 percent of any recovery his clients get. That's how the American civil justice system works. Individuals who have grievances and who can't afford to pay lawyers by the hour hire them based on a contingency fee. This creates a strong business incentive for those lawyers to take good cases, not weak ones. The question of whether a case is worth pursuing has three prongs: clarity of liability, amount of damages, and the ability to collect on a settlement or verdict. Beyond that, nothing else should matter. And given that Sharpe's lawyer immediately admitted that at least $10 million was offered to settle the case before it was filed and that the case was eventually settled without Sharpe ever responding to the civil complaint, chances are that Buzbee walked away from the Sharpe case with at least $4 million in fees. That's how it works. Find strong cases, pursue strong cases, settle or try strong cases. Buzbee did that after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, generating more than $500 million for more than 10 thousand clients who pursued claims against BP. 'I guess a bunch of old white men could say I'm targeting them, and a bunch of multinational corporations could say I'm targeting them as well,' Buzbee said. 'I guess you could say I was targeting BP. . . . Well, I probably was targeting BP.' That's how it works. For anyone who represents individuals on a contingency fee. For Buzbee, the Watson case made him a go-to choice for anyone with valid claims against current or former NFL players. Without the Watson cases, there's a good chance the plaintiff in the Sharpe case wouldn't have known Buzbee's name. That also explains Buzbee's publicity-driven style. At a time when plenty of lawyers advertise their services with gigantic billboards and goofy TV commercials, the best advertisement remains free advertisement from news coverage. Buzbee knows that. His business thrives on that. And there's no reason to pursue a weak case simply to harass someone. That said, a case that seemed strong can turn out to be weak, if the lawyer mistakenly believed a client whose story didn't hold up under scrutiny. That's what may have happened in Buzbee's misadventures with Jay-Z, which resulted in the plaintiff acknowledging inconsistencies in the story she was telling about allegations of rape when she was 13 and the case eventually being dismissed without a settlement. The Esquire profile contains this curious statement: 'Buzbee later withdrew from the case because he has not been admitted to practice law in the Southern District of New York.' The presence of that assertion in the final product, frankly, shows that whoever wrote and/or edited the story has no idea how the legal system works. Lawyers licensed in one jurisdiction routinely seek and receive what's known as pro hac vice (Latin, 'for this occasion') admission in other jurisdictions in a specific case. As long as a local lawyer who is licensed to practice in that court is personally involved in the case, pro hac vice admission is routinely granted. Actually, that's how Buzbee pursued Sharpe. The primary lawyer on the complaint filed in Las Vegas was Nevada lawyer Micah D. Nash. Buzbee's name appears on the document below Nash's, with this designation: 'Pro Hac [Vice] Forthcoming.' This doesn't mean Buzbee was targeting Jay-Z because of his race. The more plausible explanation is that Buzbee took on a case that ended up being far weaker than he thought it was, so he found a way to retreat. Of course, he's now facing a lawsuit from Jay-Z claiming that the lawsuit sparked $190 million in business losses. Unfortunately for Buzbee, he's got the money that would make him a target for a lawyer who represents plaintiffs on a contingency fee. That's the primary motivation in this specific form of legal practice. It's good business to take strong cases with significant damages against defendants who have money. The personal characteristics of the defendants do not matter. All that matters is: (1) did they do something they shouldn't have done?; (2) did those actions cause tangible and significant harm?; and (3) can they easily write a check to make things right?
