Pearl Arzola walked up to Anaheim officials and sounded a demand on behalf of her brother after a police officer fatally shot him in December.
Speaking before the Anaheim City Council on Tuesday, she called on the city to release both the unedited body camera footage of the shooting and the name of the officer who, she alleged, “murdered” Alberto Arzola, 19, in the fatal encounter.
“He had no criminal record,” Pearl said of her brother. “The Anaheim [Police Department] is quick to paint my brother as a criminal but not quick to release the [name] of the officer.”
It is a demand that family members and activists have made to no avail — whether before the council or during an informational meeting held in City Hall’s council chambers nine days after the shooting.
Manuel Cid, Anaheim’s new police chief, continued to dismiss questions about the officer’s identity at a Feb. 3 meet-and-greet.
With few exceptions, agencies are required to disclose the names of officers involved in shootings under the state’s public records law, even as investigations are ongoing. TimesOC filed a Jan. 2 public records request with Anaheim for the identity of the officer who opened fire on Arzola.
But Chief Assistant City Atty. Kristin Pelletier denied the request in a Jan. 26 response letter.
“The city is withholding this information at this time as disclosure may endanger the officer’s safety in light of threats made by the public related to this incident,” she wrote.
In the past, Anaheim PD has promptly provided officer names to the press, most recently when SWAT team officers shot and killed Brandon Lopez, a cousin of Santa Ana Councilmember Johnathan Ryan Hernandez, in 2021.
Pelletier’s letter cited a 2014 case, which actually established disclosure rights after Los Angeles Times reporter Richard Winton requested the names of Long Beach police officers involved in the high-profile shooting of Douglas Zerby, an unarmed man holding a garden hose spray nozzle, in 2010.
Alberto Arzola with his mom and dad at high school graduation
(Courtesy V. James DeSimone Law)
The Long Beach Police Officers Assn. sued to prevent disclosure, but the state Supreme Court affirmed The Times’ rights to the information. The ruling also allowed for law enforcement agencies to withhold officer identities, but not under general threats.
“There has to be a specific threat,” said Kelly Aviles, an attorney who specializes in public records law and represents The Times as outside counsel in other cases. “The Anaheim Police Department has to be able to justify why they can’t publicly disclose an officer’s name. They have the burden to demonstrate that.”
Aviles added that if someone already knows the officer’s identity and made a specific threat, the department would have to show why disclosing the name would create an additional security risk.
Sgt. Matt Sutter, an Anaheim PD spokesperson, did not respond to TimesOC questions about threats posed to officers after the Arzola shooting. Instead, he reiterated that the department is not releasing the officer’s name at this time.
Police have contended that a gang suppression unit attempted to contact Arzola and others on Dec. 6 for suspected graffiti vandalism during a routine patrol. A chase ensued as the group fled on foot and attempted to enter Arzola’s home on Philadelphia Street.
When an officer pulled Arzola out to the front yard, a struggle occurred. Police claimed Arzola “produced” a gun before the shooting took place. The weapon was recovered from the scene.
V. James DeSimone, an attorney representing the Arzola family, disputes the police narrative in a claim filed against the city, a precursor to a federal civil rights lawsuit.
DeSimone argued that an officer “aggressively yanked” Arzola by the hood of his sweatshirt and shot him afterward, as he fell down the stairs leading to the front door.
“[Arzola] was trying to brace himself with his hands on the steps as he was being dragged backwards,” the claim reads. “The use of lethal force … excessive, unnecessary [and] shocking to the conscience.”
DeSimone does not know the name of the officer in the Arzola shooting and is unaware of any credible threats made against police in connection to the case.
“There’s certainly no threats from the family,” he told TimesOC. “We are moving forward with representing our clients in the civil justice system.”
The claim lists “unknown officers” as responsible for the fatal shooting and an alleged failure to provide timely medical assistance to Arzola.
“While they’re refusing to release the name of the officer, they’re going to have to in the lawsuit,” DeSimone added.
Until then, he is demanding to see possible body cam footage from another officer who stood in front of Arzola but did not shoot.
Anaheim PD has made public the body camera footage from the officer who opened fire.
“Our review of the video evidence that is available shows that Arzola was very clearly showing his hands,” DeSimone said. “Maybe he was raising one hand with nothing in it. The other hand is flat on the ground. It appears he was trying to comply with the officer’s commands.”
A month before the shooting, Arzola faced an unrelated misdemeanor vandalism charge but the case has since been closed, online court records show.
The Orange County district attorney’s office is investigating the fatal shooting.