The Daily Populous Tuesday July 29th, 2025 night edition
Authored by theguardian.com and submitted by BigDaddyBain

US immigration officers made false and misleading statements in their reports about several Los Angeles protesters they arrested during the massive demonstrations that rocked the city in June, according to federal law enforcement files obtained by the Guardian.

The officers’ testimony was cited in at least five cases filed by the US Department of Justice amid the unrest. The justice department has charged at least 26 people with “assaulting” and “impeding” federal officers and other crimes during the protests over immigration raids. Prosecutors, however, have since been forced to dismiss at least eight of those felonies, many of them which relied on officers’ inaccurate reports, court records show.

The justice department has also dismissed at least three felony assault cases it brought against Angelenos accused of interfering with arrests during recent immigration raids, the documents show.

The rapid felony dismissals are a major embarrassment for the Trump-appointed US attorney for southern California, Bill Essayli, and appeared to be the result of an unusual series of missteps by the justice department, former federal prosecutors said.

The Guardian’s review of records found:

Out of nine “assault” and “impeding” felony cases the justice department filed immediately after the start of the protests and promoted by the attorney general, Pam Bondi, prosecutors dismissed seven of them soon after filing the charges.

In reports that led to the detention and prosecution of at least five demonstrators, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents made false statements about the sequence of events and misrepresented incidents captured on video.

One DHS agent accused a protester of shoving an officer, when footage appeared to show the opposite: the officer forcefully pushed the protester.

One indictment named the wrong defendant, a stunning error that has jeopardized one of the government’s most high-profile cases.

“When I see felonies dismissed, that tells me either the federal officers have filed affidavits that are not truthful and that has been uncovered, or US attorneys reviewing the cases realize the evidence does not support the charges,” said Cristine Soto DeBerry, a former California state prosecutor who is now director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, a criminal justice reform group.

She said officers often call for charges that prosecutors don’t end up filing, but it was uncommon for the justice department to file, then dismiss cases, especially numerous felonies in rapid succession.

“It seems this is a way to detain people, hold them in custody, instill fear and discourage people from exercising their first amendment rights,” DeBerry said.

There are at least 18 cases brought by the justice department against LA protesters that prosecutors have not dismissed, covering a wide array of alleged criminal conduct, according to case records the US attorney’s office shared with the Guardian. In three of those cases, protesters have agreed to plea deals, including one defendant accused of spitting at an officer and another who allegedly threw rocks. Some still facing charges are accused of throwing bottles and molotov cocktails, pointing a laser at a helicopter and aiding in civil disorder by distributing gas masks.

In six of the felony dismissals reviewed by the Guardian, the justice department has refiled lower-level misdemeanors against the defendants.

For the many protesters whose charges were withdrawn or scaled back, the officers’ initial allegations, as well as the department’s filings, have deeply affected their lives. All the demonstrators who won dismissals spent time in jail before the government’s cases against them fell apart.

“We are not the violent ones,” said Jose Mojica, one of the protesters whose assault case was dismissed, in an earlier Guardian interview. “They are chasing down innocent people.”

Dismissed ‘in the interest of justice’

The justice department’s initial wave of cases stemmed from one of the first major protests in the LA region, a demonstration on 7 June in the south Los Angeles city of Paramount. Border patrol sightings had sparked fears that agents were targeting laborers at a Home Depot, and as dozens of locals and demonstrators gathered outside an office complex that houses DHS, officers fired teargas and flash-bang grenades while some protesters threw objects.

The US attorney’s office filed a joint case against five demonstrators, charging each with assaulting officers, a felony the justice department warned could carry 20-year sentences.

A criminal complaint, written by DHS and filed in court by the justice department on 8 June, said that as the crowd grew, some protesters “turned violent”. Two sisters, Ashley, 20, and Joceline Rodriguez, 26, began “blocking” officers’ vehicles, the complaint alleged. When a border patrol agent attempted to move Ashley, she “resisted” and “shoved the agent with both her hands”, then Joceline “grabbed the arm” of one of the agents to prevent her sister’s arrest, the charges said. Both were arrested.

In an investigative file, the DHS suggested that “in response” to the sisters’ arrest, Christian Cerna-Camacho, another protester, began to “verbally harass” agents, making threatening remarks. Demonstrator Brayan Ramos-Brito, then “pushed [an] agent in the chest”, the DHS claimed, at which point, a fifth protester, Jose Mojica, “used his body to physically shield” Ramos-Brito and then “elbowed and pushed” agents. Agents then “subdued” and arrested Mojica and Ramos-Brito, the complaint said.

View image in fullscreen A protester holds a sign as he stands in front of federal agents as the groups clashed near a Home Depot after a raid was conducted Ice in Paramount on 7 June. Photograph: Allison Dinner/EPA

All five defendants are Latino US citizens.

The DHS’s own subsequent reports, however, reveal multiple factual discrepancies in the narrative initially presented by officers and prosecutors. While the complaint suggested Cerna-Camacho, Ramos Brito and Mojica attacked agents in protest of the sisters’ arrest, records show the women were arrested in a separate incident – which occurred after the men were detained.

Border patrol agent Eduardo Mejorado, a key witness considered a victim of the assaults, appeared to initially give inaccurate testimony about the order of events. He “clarified” the timeline when questioned, a DHS special agent wrote in a report three days after charges were filed. A supervisor on the scene also documented the correct chronology in a later report and “apologized” for errors, saying, “Due to the chaos of the events that day, some events may have been miscommunicated.” Mojica had outlined the discrepancies in an interview with the Guardian days after his arrest.

The DHS special agent also noted that defense lawyers had presented video they said was “in direct contrast to the facts” laid out in the initial complaint. The footage, seen by the Guardian, appeared to show an agent pushing Ramos-Brito, not the other way around, before he was taken to the ground along with Mojica, who was also not seen in the footage shoving or assaulting agents.

The agent acknowledged the officer’s shoving and said the subsequent “fight” was “hard to decipher”. The agent also claimed Ramos-Brito’s behavior before he was pushed included “pre-assault indicators”, such as “clenching fists” and “getting in [the agent’s] face”.

Meanwhile, chaotic social media footage of the arrest of the sisters appeared to show an officer pushing Ashley, prompting her to briefly raise her hand, at which point two agents grabbed her and took her to the ground. Her older sister was then seen briefly touching the arm of one of the agents on top of her sister. Both appeared to be filming with their phones before their arrests, and it’s unclear who the DHS and the justice department were alleging were the victims in their purported assaults.

DHS records also show that one supervisor emailed a female border patrol agent seen in the video standing near the sisters, saying he was “trying to tie that whole event together for prosecution” and looking into a “rumor” Ashley “may have shoved” this agent. The agent responded that she had told Ashley to move, but did not say she was shoved.

Within two weeks of the initial charges, the US attorney’s office filed motions to dismiss the cases against the sisters, Ramos-Brito and Mojica “in the interest of justice”, without providing further explanation.

The justice department then filed a new case against the sisters, this time accusing them each of a single misdemeanor, saying they “assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with” the border patrol, but offering no detail. The sisters pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanors; Ashley’s lawyer declined to comment and Joceline’s attorney did not respond to inquiries.

The justice department also filed a misdemeanor indictment against Ramos-Brito, but then said it was erroneous and rescinded it, only to refile a misdemeanor in a different format. Ramos-Brito pleaded not guilty and his lawyer didn’t respond to emails.

Mojica, who spoke out about how he was injured during his arrest, has not been charged again.

Essayli, the US attorney for LA, who is an ardent Trump supporter appointed this year, initially published mugshots of the defendants, but has not publicly acknowledged that he has since dismissed their felonies. Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for Essayli, declined to comment on a detailed list of questions about specific cases. The LA Times reported last week that Essayli was heard “screaming” at a prosecutor over a grand jury’s refusal to indict one of the protesters.

View image in fullscreen Law enforcement clashes with demonstrators during a protest following federal immigration operations, in the Compton neighborhood of Los Angeles on 7 June. Photograph: Ringo Chiu/AFP/Getty Images

McEvoy said the LA Times story relied on “factual inaccuracies and anonymous gossip”, without offering specifics, adding in an email: “Our office will continue working unapologetically to charge all those who assault our agents or impede our federal investigations.”

Bondi defended Essayli in a statement, calling him a “champion for law and order who has done superlative work to prosecute rioters for attacking and obstructing law enforcement in Los Angeles”. She added: “This Department of Justice is proud of Bill, and he has my complete support as he continues working to protect Californians and Make America Safe Again.”

Jaime Ruiz, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection, which oversees border patrol, did not respond to detailed questions about cases and officers’ inaccurate testimony, saying the department is “unable to comment on cases under active litigation”.

“DHS and its components continue to enforce the law every day in greater Los Angeles even in the face of danger,” he added. “Our officers are facing a surge in assaults and attacks against them as they put their lives on the line to enforce our nation’s laws. Secretary [Kristi] Noem has been clear: If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary, added in a statement: “Our agents, officers, and prosecutors will continue to work together to keep Americans safe, and we will follow the facts, evidence, and law.” Mejorado, the border patrol agent, could not be reached.

Cerna-Camacho is the only defendant of the five whose original charges are still pending, but when he showed up to court for his recent arraignment, the justice department attorney was forced to admit his office had made an error: the one-paragraph indictment filed against Cerna-Camacho erroneously named Ramos Brito. Cerna-Camacho’s lawyers have argued that the government’s 30-day window to indict his client had passed, and the case must be dismissed. Cerna-Camacho pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer declined to comment.

“This is an extraordinary mistake and a dangerous embarrassment,” said Sergio Perez, a former justice department lawyer who is now executive director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, a California-based legal advocacy group, about Cerna-Camacho’s case. “The US Department of Justice is supposed to be the pinnacle of professional and responsible criminal prosecutions. When you can’t get the name right, it calls into question all other factual assertions in those documents. It’s way beyond a clerical error. It’s smoke where there is likely fire.”

The case is a significant one for the Trump administration. Cerna-Camacho was arrested four days after the protest, when two unmarked vehicles rammed his car while his toddler and infant were inside, with officers deploying teargas. The incident caused outrage locally.

But DHS aggressively defended the arrest, publishing a photo of Cerna-Camacho being detained, and saying he had “punched” a border patrol officer at the Paramount protests. Video from the protest showed Cerna-Camacho and an officer scuffling in a chaotic crowd, with Cerna-Camacho at one point raising his hand, but it’s unclear if he made contact with the officer.

In an initial complaint against Jacob Terrazas, DHS accused the man of felony assault, saying he was “one of several individuals … actively throwing hard objects [at officers]” during the Paramount protests, without referencing specific evidence or details. Video of his arrest showed an officer slamming him to the ground, and at his arraignment, Terrazas appeared badly concussed, and a judge ordered he immediately get medical attention.

Terrazas was released after nine days in jail, then two days later, the justice department moved to dismiss the case. However, prosecutors filed a new misdemeanor charge, accusing him of a “simple assault” misdemeanor, saying he “aided and abetted” others and “forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with” a border patrol employee, without providing details. Terrazas has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer did not respond to inquiries.

The government has also dismissed its “conspiracy to impede an officer” felony charges against Gisselle Medina, but then filed an “accessory” to “assault” misdemeanor, claiming in a brief charging document that she had “assisted the offenders”. The charges did not offer any details on how she allegedly assisted others. Medina has not yet been arraigned and her lawyer did not respond to inquiries.

The justice department also recently dismissed felony assault charges against Russell Gomez Dzul, who had been stopped on 7 June by border patrol when officers deemed him suspicious for appearing “nervous” near them and biking away, but then filed a simple assault misdemeanor, without offering details. He has pleaded not guilty and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment. Andrea Velez, a US citizen arrested during a 24 June raid in downtown LA on her way to work, also had a felony assault charge dismissed this month, and has not faced further prosecution.

View image in fullscreen A large crowd fills the streets during an anti-Ice protest in downtown Los Angeles. Photograph: Sahab Zaribaf/Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images

One of the only cases from the first round of prosecutions that the government has not dropped is the one that made international headlines – the arrest of David Huerta, a prominent California union leader jailed while observing an immigration raid.

Carley Palmer, a lawyer who served as a supervisor in the US attorney’s office in LA until she left last year, said the dismissals and downgrading of charges probably occurred after more in-depth evaluation by line prosecutors and supervisors, and in some ways reflected “the process working”: “We want prosecutors to feel they can re-evaluate evidence and change their mind when new information comes to light.” Prosecutors might dismiss cases if a grand jury declines to indict, if they believe they can’t persuade jurors at trial, or if they learn officers violated the defendants’ rights, she added.

The LA Times reported that Essayli has struggled to secure indictments at grand juries.

Palmer, now an attorney at the Halpern May Ybarra Gelberg firm, said it was unusual, however, for the office to prosecute these kinds of “he said she said” protest scuffles in the first place, taking away resources from traditional priorities, including fraud, economic crimes, public corruption and civil rights abuses.

“Federal charges are very serious and have real implications for people’s lives,” Palmer added. “Even if it gets dismissed, it will be on someone’s record for the rest of their lives. It carries a lot of consequences, so you want prosecutors to understand and appreciate the power they have.”

ThinkinDeeply on July 28th, 2025 at 12:20 UTC »

"Out of nine “assault” and “impeding” felony cases the justice department filed immediately after the start of the protests and promoted by the attorney general, Pam Bondi, prosecutors dismissed seven of them soon after filing the charges.

In reports that led to the detention and prosecution of at least five demonstrators, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents made false statements about the sequence of events and misrepresented incidents captured on video. One DHS agent accused a protester of shoving an officer, when footage appeared to show the opposite: the officer forcefully pushed the protester. One indictment named the wrong defendant, a stunning error that has jeopardized one of the government’s most high-profile cases.

“When I see felonies dismissed, that tells me either the federal officers have filed affidavits that are not truthful and that has been uncovered, or US attorneys reviewing the cases realize the evidence does not support the charges,” said Cristine Soto DeBerry, a former California state prosecutor who is now director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, a criminal justice reform group.

She said officers often call for charges that prosecutors don’t end up filing, but it was uncommon for the justice department to file, then dismiss cases, especially numerous felonies in rapid succession.

“It seems this is a way to detain people, hold them in custody, instill fear and discourage people from exercising their first amendment rights,” DeBerry said."

Luckily all those super moral people who were really concerned with "following the law" and our constitution who expressed outrage over these protesters' behavior will ALSO be SUPER duper concerned and upset that officers of the law would fabricate claims. I'm just so thankful for what will DEFINITELY be their consistent dedication to not selectively becoming outraged based on their political bias, because for sure thats not what they were doing before and we will hear many a conservative express their dissatisfaction with this and call a lot of their attention and concern to it......right? We still care about government accountability, right??

Or maybe the cockroaches won't even have the integrity to acknowledge this thread exists. Buncha hypocritical cowards will continue the distraction game, guaranteed.

Ooh_its_a_lady on July 28th, 2025 at 12:04 UTC »

Thats their whole motive. Do whatever in the streets and put the burden on the legal system and then make the tax payers accountable to pay for it.

They legit are their own private entity that is answerable to no one for how they operate.

huggernot on July 28th, 2025 at 12:02 UTC »

So will the officers be charged with obstruction of justice, filing a false police report, violating civil rights, false imprisonment, kidnapping while in possession of a firearm, assault & battery, lying under oath, and violation of oath?