LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles police Chief Jim McDonnell on Monday defended his agency’s handling of the recent immigration-enforcement protests, which sparked some allegations of excessive force and indiscriminate use of non-lethal weaponry and tear gas, with the chief saying suggestions the response was undisciplined or lacked oversight are “simply not accurate.”
In a lengthy written statement, McDonnell said he felt compelled to respond to recent allegations — some raised in a weekend report by the Los Angeles Times — questioning the LAPD’s tactics in dealing with protesters over the past two weeks.
McDonnell said he takes all accusations of misconduct seriously and all use-of-force cases will be investigated.
“Our officers are held to the highest standards — legally, ethically, and operationally,” the chief said. “And when we find that an officer has fallen short, we take swift and appropriate action. That is not new. That is our duty.”
But McDonnell said accountability “must cut both ways,” pointing to the “dangerous, fluid and ultimately violent conditions our officers encountered.”
“When demonstrators began throwing objects, setting fires, and refusing to disperse after repeated lawful orders were given, officers were justified in taking swift and measured action to prevent further harm and restore public safety,” the chief said.
“In numerous well-documented cases, our officers were not met with peaceful protest. They were violently attacked, and 52 LAPD officers sustained injuries that required medical treatment. Commercial-grade fireworks that could kill were launched directly at them. Bottles, bricks, and projectiles were hurled at their heads and bodies, in addition to incendiary devices and Molotov cocktails. A motorcycle was weaponized and deliberately driven into a police skirmish line. These were not isolated events; they were coordinated and dangerous acts by criminal agitators intent on causing harm — not just to officers, but to nearby demonstrators and bystanders.”
McDonnell said the use of foam rounds and chemical agents such as tear gas was not approved indiscriminately, but was instead authorized “in direct response to immediate, credible threats.” He also insisted that dispersal orders were delivered in accordance with legal standards, and all of the department’s actions were subject to oversight.
“To suggest our response lacked discipline or oversight is simply not accurate,” he said. “We were in contact with city leaders and operated within a unified command structure alongside multiple local and regional agencies, including the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol. Our shared goal throughout was to restore order, preserve life, and uphold constitutional rights.”
One protester, Bridgette Covelli, told The Times she took part in the June 14 No Kings Day protest downtown. She said that well before a downtown curfew was set to take effect, LAPD officers began to fire rubber bullets and smoke bombs at protesters, despite no dispersal order being given. She told the paper she was with a hard-foam projectile that broke her forearm.
Shakeer Rahman, a civil rights attorney and community organizer with the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, told The Times that he saw two colleagues on June 8 who were demanding to know an officer’s badge number get shot with a 40mm less-lethal projectile launcher at close range.
“It’s an officer who doesn’t want to be questioned and knows he can get away with firing these shots,” Rahman told the paper.
Another protester, Raphael Mimoun, told The Times he was part of a protest on June 8, and officers eventually moved in quickly on the group.
“I don’t know if they made any announcement, any dispersal order, but basically you had like a line of mounted police coming behind the line of cops that were on foot and then they just started charging, moving forward super fast, pushing people, screaming at people, shooting rubber bullets,” he said.
McDonnell insisted that the department is committed to protecting people’s right to peacefully protest, but said officers also must respond to people who instigate violence or take advantage of protests to commit crimes.
“Some have questioned our tactics,” he said. “Others have cited edited video clips or anecdotal accounts as definitive evidence of misconduct. We must separate fact from speculation and context from narrative.
“To those who protested peacefully: we see you, we respect you, and we will continue to protect your right to speak and assemble. To those who sought to exploit these moments of civic expression for criminal ends: your actions endangered lives, and we will continue to respond lawfully and decisively to prevent further harm.
“To the people of Los Angeles: thank you for your high expectations. You deserve accountability, transparency, and fairness, and we are committed to delivering all three not just in this moment, but every day we put on the badge.
“The LAPD is not perfect. But we are principled. We are evolving. And we are committed — every single day — to maintaining public trust, and to serving this city with courage, compassion, and constitutional integrity.”