[REVISION HISTORY]

LAPD Officer Daniel Flores Felony Charges Reduced

Updated 5 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-08-21 01:37 UTC → 2026-08-26 03:16 UTC · added ~~removed~~

Los Angeles Police Department Officer Daniel Flores was charged with 16 felony counts of eavesdropping after secretly recording fellow officers making racist, ~~sexist~~ sexist, and homophobic remarks between March and October 2024. The recordings, which Flores turned over to internal affairs, were intended to expose workplace misconduct, but prosecutors argued that California law prohibits recording private conversations without consent, regardless of motive. The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office announced the charges, noting that a conviction could carry up to 13 years in prison. Flores’s attorney contended that the prosecution punishes a whistleblower exposing bigotry within the department. In August 2026, District Attorney Nathan Hochman announced that the felony charges against Flores would be reduced to misdemeanors. Hochman stated the decision was made after the office was “listening to the impact the case was having on potential whistleblowers” to avoid creating a “chilling effect” that might deter future reporting of wrongdoing. While Hochman maintained that Flores violated California’s two-party consent eavesdropping laws, he reversed the felony filing following criticism from legal experts and city leaders, including Mayor Karen Bass. The recordings captured over 100 conversations, including derogatory stereotypes regarding Black and Latino individuals, as well as comments about women and queer people. The officers recorded by Flores are facing internal LAPD disciplinary actions, including reprimands, suspensions, or terminations. Following the reduction of charges, ~~Flores’s attorney, Alan Jackson, described the outcome as an “absolute victory.”~~ Flores is expected to enter a court diversion program, which could lead to a full dismissal of the charges after approximately one year of compliance. Recent developments have highlighted allegations of retaliation; internal LAPD documents suggest potential irregularities in the timing of the prosecution. Records indicate that prosecutors initially declined to bring charges in July 2025 due to insufficient evidence, yet the District Attorney’s office moved forward with the prosecution less than three weeks after Flores filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the city. Flores and his legal team maintain that the criminal charges were a direct response to his civil litigation.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.