
Officer who used excessive force allowed to plead guilty to misdemeanor after felony conviction
LOS ANGELES — A Los Angeles sheriff's deputy will serve four months in prison on a misdemeanor conviction for using excessive force after the new Trump-appointed U.S. attorney offered an unusual plea deal despite a jury convicting him of a felony.
The victim's attorney asked a federal appeals court to reinstate the felony conviction, but the court declined to do so on Thursday.
Deputy Trevor Kirk was recorded tackling and pepper-spraying an older woman while she filmed a man being handcuffed outside a supermarket in June 2023. A federal jury in February found Kirk guilty of one felony count of deprivation of rights under color of law, a crime that carries a prison sentence of up to 10 years. Felony convictions also prevent law enforcement officials from continuing to serve or owning a gun.
But when U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli took office a few months later, federal prosecutors offered Kirk a plea deal — a dismissal of the felony if Kirk pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, and a recommendation of one year of probation. A judge agreed to the lessened charge but sentenced Kirk to four months in prison on Monday.
Essayli said in a video posted online that prosecutors also offered Kirk a misdemeanor plea agreement under the prior administration, which he turned down.
"After reviewing this case extensively and thoroughly and carefully reviewing the facts and the law, I made the decision to re-extend the misdemeanor plea agreement to Deputy Kirk," Essayli said.
In court filings signed off by Essayli, prosecutors wrote they believed that Kirk's actions fell on the lower end of the excessive force spectrum, the woman did not suffer "serious bodily injury," and that the case was prosecuted improperly.
Some former prosecutors and police conviction experts called the step highly unusual, especially without any indication of prosecutorial misconduct, ethical violations or new evidence in the case. It follows President Donald Trump's vow to "protect and defend" law enforcement officers from prosecution and his efforts to assert greater control over the U.S. Justice Department.
"It's very unusual to offer a plea deal after a conviction," said Jeffrey Bellin, a former federal prosecutor from Washington, D.C., who is now a law professor at William and Mary Law School. In cases where it could happen, there's usually new evidence of innocence, "not just the same evidence from a different perspective," he said.
Kirk's attorney, Tom Yu, said they filed a motion for acquittal that was denied but planned to appeal the decision.
The encounter
Caree Harper, who represents the woman Kirk injured, said in court filings that the federal government changed its account of the incident to make Kirk's actions seem justified.
In the original indictment, prosecutors wrote Kirk "violently" threw the woman to the ground. In the new plea agreement, the government alleged the woman "swatted" at Kirk and "resisted," Harper wrote, which she said was not proven in the criminal trial nor testified to in civil litigation.
She said her client did not commit a crime, had no weapon, and did not try to flee or resist. She suffered from a black eye, a fractured bone in her right wrist, multiple bruises, scratches and significant chemical burning from the pepper-spray.
Harper said the plea agreement sent a "dangerous message" that law enforcement officials could be convicted of a felony and still "cut a backroom deal after the trial."
Philip Stinson, a former police officer and attorney who studies police misconduct, said the plea deal offered to Kirk was "seemingly without precedent" in federal court cases prosecuting police officers for their on-duty crimes, according to his search of an internal database of more than 24,000 arrest cases in the last 20 years involving sworn law enforcement officers.
LA County Sheriff's Department spokesperson Nicole Nishida said Kirk will remain employed with the agency but relieved from duty while it conducts an internal investigation to determine if any policy or procedures were violated.
A new approach by federal prosecutors
Kirk's case is the latest showing the Trump administration's plan to take a lighter hand in the federal government's traditional role in prosecuting police misconduct. Trump's April executive order on policing promised the "unleashing" of law enforcement and support for their legal defense.
The Justice Department announced in May it was canceling proposed consent decrees reached with Minneapolis and Louisville to implement policing reforms in the wake of the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. The department also announced it would retract its findings in six other sweeping investigations into police departments that the Biden administration had accused of civil rights violations.
Trump-appointed federal judges have also played a hand in dismissing cases against police officers, including murder charges against a former Atlanta police officer who shot and killed an unarmed man hiding in a closet in 2019.
Experts say the reliance on the federal government to perform this policing oversight comes from the close relationship between local prosecutors and police officers, who regularly work together to investigate crimes.
"We are often looking at the federal government to serve as a check and balance for local law enforcement officials who are accused of really egregious activity toward the public," said Devin Hart, a spokesperson for the National Police Accountability Project.
All four members of the original prosecutors withdrew from the case after the new plea deal was presented, and at least one resigned from the office, according to court filings. Two others took the buyout offered to federal employees, spokesperson Ciaran McEvoy confirmed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NBC News
43 minutes ago
- NBC News
Trump says he thinks the government has a ‘very easy case' against Kilmar Abrego Garcia
President Donald Trump on Saturday said that it wasn't his decision to bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, back to the U.S. to face federal charges, saying the 'Department of Justice decided to do it that way, and that's fine.' 'That wasn't my decision,' Trump said of Abrego Garcia's return in a phone call with NBC News on Saturday. 'It should be a very easy case' for federal prosecutors, the president added. Trump added that he did not speak with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele about Abrego Garcia's return, even though the two men spoke about Abrego Garcia during an April meeting in the Oval Office. His remarks came after Abrego Garcia arrived back in the U.S. on Friday and was charged in an indictment alleging he transported people who were not legally in the country. The indictment came amid a protracted legal battle over whether to bring him back from El Salvador that escalated all the way up to the Supreme Court. Abrego Garcia's family and lawyers have called him a family man, while Trump and his administration have alleged that he is a member of the gang MS-13. The case drew national attention amid the Trump administration's broader push for mass deportations. After Abrego Garcia's deportation, lawyers for the Trump administration said he was deported in an ' administrative error,' as Abrego Garcia had previous legal protection from deportation to El Salvador. Still, the Trump administration did not attempt to bring Abrego Garcia back, even as the Supreme Court ruled that it had to ' facilitate ' his return to the U.S. Democrats, including Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., had for weeks said that Abrego Garcia was denied due process when he was detained and deported, arguing that he should have been allowed to defend himself from deportation before he was sent to El Salvador. Trump on Saturday called Van Hollen, who went to visit Abrego Garcia in jail in El Salvador in April, a 'loser' for defending the man's right to due process. 'He's a loser. The guy's a loser. They're going to lose because of that same thing. That's not what people want to hear,' the president said about Van Hollen. 'He's trying to defend a man who's got a horrible record of abuse, abuse of women in particular. No, he's a total loser, this guy.' On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi alleged that Abrego Garcia 'was a smuggler of humans and children and women. He made over 100 trips, the grand jury found, smuggling people throughout our country.' In a statement Friday, Abrego Garcia's lawyer called Bondi's move 'an abuse of power, not justice.'


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump says Musk will face 'very serious consequences' if he funds Democratic candidates -NBC News
June 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump, in an interview with NBC News on Saturday, said there would be "serious consequences" if billionaire Elon Musk funds Democratic Party candidates to run against Republicans who vote for Trump's sweeping tax-cut bill. Trump declined to say what those consequences would be in the phone interview, and went on to add that he had not had discussions about whether to investigate Musk. Asked if he thought his relationship with the Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, "I would assume so, yeah."


NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Trump says Elon Musk will face 'very serious consequences' if he funds Democratic candidates
President Donald Trump on Saturday said there would be 'serious consequences' if tech mogul Elon Musk funds Democratic candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of the GOP's sweeping budget bill. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC News in a phone interview, but declined to share what those consequences would be. 'He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,' he added. The president also said he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk after a feud between the two men erupted into public view earlier this week. 'No,' Trump said when asked if he had any wish to do so. Asked if he thought his relationship with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, 'I would assume so, yeah.' Trump's comments were the most extensive since he and Musk exchanged threats and attacks on X and Truth Social earlier this week. He added that he thought the Republican Party was more unified than ever after the two men fell out in front of the world. Trump added that he has no plans to speak with Musk anytime soon, saying, 'I'm too busy doing other things' and 'I have no intention of speaking to him.' Trump also accused Musk of being 'disrespectful to the office of the President.' 'I think it's a very bad thing, because he's very disrespectful. You could not disrespect the office of the President,' he added. Musk on Thursday launched a barrage of posts on X against the president, including a now-deleted post highlighting the onetime links between the president and the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 'That's called 'old news,' that's been old news, that has been talked about for years,' Trump said on Saturday. 'Even Epstein's lawyer said I had nothing to do with it. It's old news.' For days, Musk had been critical of a GOP-led spending bill that the House passed last month. In the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump responded to Musk's criticisms, telling reporters, 'I'm very disappointed because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill. I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.' Shortly after those comments, Musk launched his flurry of posts, including promoting a post calling for Trump to be impeached and another where he said the president's tariff agenda would cause a recession later this year. Trump on Thursday also responded with his own posts on Truth Social. In one post, he wrote, 'I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,' suggesting that Musk knew what was in the bill before it was passed. He also wrote on Thursday, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' referring to federal contracts with SpaceX. On Saturday, Trump said that he hadn't given his suggestion about canceling Musk's companies' federal contracts any more thought. 'I'd be allowed to do that,' he said, 'but I have, I haven't given it any thought.' He also cast doubt on the notion that Musk's opposition to the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' is jeopardizing the bill's chances of success, saying he's 'very confident' that the bill will pass the Senate before July 4. 'The Republican Party has never been united like this before. It's never been. It's actually more so than it was three days ago,' Trump said. Musk contributed major financial support to Trump's presidential bid in 2024, spending over a quarter of a billion dollars to boost him in swing states last year. In the first months of the administration, Trump put Musk in charge of DOGE, where he oversaw mass layoffs of federal workers and the shuttering or partial closing of several agencies. The feud, Trump said, has made lawmakers see the benefits of the bill. 'I think, actually, Elon brought out the strengths of the bill because people that weren't as focused started focusing on it, and they see how good it is,' Trump said. 'So in that sense, there was a big favor. But I think Elon, really, I think it's a shame that he's so depressed and so heartbroken.'