Culver City Police Department-Body Camera Footage Request

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the California Public Records Act, I hereby request the following records:

I, Sebastian Ospina, authorize the Law Office of Annette Morasch, located at 5701 W. Slauson Ave., #210, Culver City, CA 90230, annette@amoraschlaw.com to obtain all of the following concerning the Culver City Police Department’s interaction with Sebastian Ospina on October 6, 2021 outside of the office of TikTok. This interaction shall be defined as “INCIDENT.”
1. All body camera footage of all responding officers to the INCIDENT.
2. All dash camera footage of all responding officers to the INCIDENT. This includes dash camera footage starting 30 seconds before any radio call to the INCIDENT.
3. All audio files of radio traffic concerning the INCIDENT.
4. All 911 calls concerning the INCIDENT.
5. All police reports concerning the INCIDENT.
6. All documents CCPD submitted to any health care provider concerning Sebastian Ospina.
7. All audio files of Sebastian Ospina prior to the INCIDENT.
8. All notes taken from any conversation with Sebastian Ospina before, during, or after the INCIDENT.
In addition, we request all of the following relating to any CCPD interaction with Sebastian Ospina on September 22, 2021.
9. All audio files of Sebastian Ospina.
10. All CCPD Station footage of Sebastian Ospina.
11. All records maintained by CCPD concerning Sebastian Ospina’s visit to CCPD Station on September 22, 2021, including but not limited to any documents created or maintained by Destinee King and/or Brent Arney.

A signed authorization shall be sent to the Culver City, City Attorney.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Annette Morasch

Hello,
In August 2020, I provided the City of Culver City with ample legal authority for the discoverability of body camera footage. As such, the CCPD's response is not in conformance with the law.
This email serves as a meet and confer effort to resolve this matter without resort to potentially lengthy and
expensive litigation. If the City refuses to produce the requested documents, we will be filing a petition for writ
of mandate to compel the City to produce the requested documents. We will be also be seeking attorneys’ fees
and costs.
The PRA was enacted for the purpose of increasing freedom of information by giving members of the public
access to records in the possession of local agencies. The California Legislature found this right of access to be
“a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state.” (Gov’t Code section 6250.) This right was
confirmed and expanded upon by the people of California when we passed an amendment to our Constitution,
securing a “right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business.” (Cal. Const., art. 1,
Section 3, subd. (b)(1).)
As you very well know, 6254(f) has nothing to do with the requests here. Rather, 6254(f) concerns
investigations conducted by, and complaints to, the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, and any
state or local police agency. Be that as it may, assuming in arguendo, that 6254(f) applies, the Code actually
requires the City to produce the documents to me. Recordings “shall be disclosed promptly, upon request,
to any of the following: The subject of the recording whose privacy is to be protected, or their authorized
representative.” If we are pretending 6254 applies, the City must state, in writing, “the specific basis for” the
failure to produce the requested information. Even if there is supposedly an ongoing investigation into the
CCPD’s abusive handling of Mr. Ospina, the City must first show that releasing the footage would “substantially
interfere with” the investigation, and the City must provide an estimated date for the disclosure of the
video/audio recording. You have done neither. Mr. Ospina has a right to see the body camera footage, the field
investigation card, and dash cam footage, etc. This is clearly a matter of public interest. So please, state why the
CCPD is not being transparent. Please state why the CCPD is not releasing the footage.
If CCPD is withholding information due to portions being confidential, CCPD has a right to redact identifiable information, but you cannot completely withhold it. See National Lawyers Guild San Francisco Bay Area Chapter v. City of Hayward, 9 Cal.5th 488 (May 28, 2020).
Moreover, the City is acting in a hypocritical manner and arbitrarily determining which body worn and dash
camera footage it wants to release, including in public posting about ongoing investigations. The City released the footage of LAPD Captain Darnell Davenport. The City released footage of the double choking of Terry Walton.
If I do not receive the requested documents and recordings within 10 business days, I will assume the City is
uninterested in resolving this matter without court intervention. I will then exercise all the rights afforded to
the public through a writ of mandate, and seek attorneys’ fees and costs.

What is the status of this appeal?

On what legal basis is CCPD withholding body camera and dash camera footage from the representative of the arrestee?
6254(f) applies, the Code actually requires the City to produce the documents to me. Recordings “shall be disclosed promptly, upon request,
to any of the following: The subject of the recording whose privacy is to be protected, or their authorized
representative.” If we are pretending 6254 applies, the City must state, in writing, “the specific basis for” the
failure to produce the requested information. Even if there is supposedly an ongoing investigation into the
CCPD’s abusive handling of Mr. Ospina, the City must first show that releasing the footage would “substantially
interfere with” the investigation, and the City must provide an estimated date for the disclosure of the
video/audio recording.

I represent Mr. Ospina for the purposes of obtaining these recordings and information. If I do not receive the requested information by May 3, 2022, I will file a petition for writ of mandate and seek attorneys' fees. Please contact Senior Deputy City Attorney Lisa Vidra or the Deputy City Attorney Caroline K. Castillo as these individuals have previously made available the body camera footage of my other clients' arrests by the CCPD.