Nathan Hochman, a longtime defense attorney and former official in George W. Bush’s Department of Justice, is hoping to unseat incumbent George Gascón as LA’s next district attorney in November. Hochman explains his change in party affiliation, defending Sheriff Lee Baca, and his “hard middle” approach to crime.
More: LA DA George Gascón stands by his progressive prosecutor ideals
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
KCRW: You were a registered Republican before you decided to run for DA as an independent. Why did you change your party affiliation? And is it because LA is a heavily Democratic county, and having an “R” next to your name would potentially turn off voters?
Hochman: “I've been a lifelong centrist. I voted for the person over the party since I could vote. I started 20 years as a registered Democrat, then a registered Republican, and now I'm an Independent. And I registered as an Independent as I ran for this race because I really want to send the message to voters: That's exactly how I would be running the DA's office.
Our current DA is actually not just resolving cases based on the facts and the law, as I would. But he's introduced a political filter — that being his own personal political agenda — to determine that certain crimes and certain criminals, notwithstanding the facts and the law, won't be prosecuted. So I think by registering as an Independent extends a very strong message to voters [of] exactly how I’ll run the office.
We talked to the DA, George Gascón, about some of the progressive policies that he implemented when he took office. And some of them include not charging juveniles as adults, not seeking the death penalty — obviously there's a moratorium on that statewide — but also not seeking life in prison without the possibility of parole. He's walked some of these back, including sentencing enhancements. He had a ban on those, but he's walked some of that back. But I'm wondering if there's anything in his progressive agenda that you would keep?
So there is. For instance … he renamed a unit that was called the Conviction Review Unit that Jackie Lacey started in 2015. It actually was one of the first in the nation that looks to see if there are factually innocent people in prison, and get them out. He renamed that unit the Conviction Integrity Unit. And he has exonerated certain people. I would not only continue that unit, but I would do my best to actually make it as effective as possible.
One of the biggest differences between George Gascón and myself is that I've actually been in the courts. He has never personally prosecuted or defended a single criminal case in his life, yet he's been the top prosecutor in two different jurisdictions. I have 34 years — 10 of it as a prosecutor, 24 of it as a defense attorney — where I've been committed to making sure everyone's constitutional rights are respected, that they're honored, that the government proves its case beyond a reasonable doubt. So I believe I can institute real and effective criminal justice reforms like exonerating the factually innocent, going after police officers who crossed the line.
George Gascón said he was going to review all of Jackie Lacey's cases, and he's actually hired a guy at $750,000 who has brought … one case against an officer from those cases, and that case is caught up in the courts. I can bring real and effective criminal justice reform in this regard, because I personally prosecuted dirty cops, basically someone who stole drugs, guns, and money from a drug dealer. I, along with a team of federal prosecutors, convicted over 16 of them. And I would actually be able to do the work. I could instruct people to do the work. I could lead by example. In a way George Gascón has failed the criminal justice agenda over the last four years.
Well, you also defended LA's top cop, Sheriff Lee Baca, who was found guilty in 2017 by a federal jury of interfering with an investigation into abuses in the LA County jails, and lying to the FBI about it. He went to prison, and you defended him. Why?
I defended him as I defended all the people I've defended over the last 24 years to basically assert their constitutional rights in court. I'm sure you, or George Gascón, or anybody listening to this doesn't have a problem in our system with being presumed innocent, having a lawyer represent you, and do their best to test the government's evidence to make sure it's both legally admissible, and it proves any case well beyond a reasonable doubt.
But I know the difference between being a prosecutor and a defense attorney. George Gascón has done neither job. And right now, effectively, he's acting as a defense attorney, which, quite candidly, leaves victims without anybody to champion their causes. In other words, you got a prosecutor and a defense attorney working for the defendant, and nobody working for the victims.
You didn't have to take the Baca case. You voluntarily chose to take the Baca case. And here was a man accused of presiding over a litany of abuses in the LA County jails. So what about this case appealed to you?
Well, I'm sure if you know the Baca case, you know Leroy Baca had actually two trials. At the first trial, the jury found him 11 to 1 not guilty. They then after had a second trial, the judge excluded 50% of the evidence that was introduced in the first trial, and the jury found him guilty, ultimately affirmed by appeal. … The government's evidence, I believe — and the jury almost unanimously agreed with me in the first trial — was less than the burden of proof it had to make. I argued the same thing in the second trial. As a prosecutor, I will benefit from my 24 years of experience in tearing down government cases, because I'll understand that if I bring or preside over, or authorize any case being brought by the DA’s office, that it meets the highest standard of proof in the land, which is beyond a reasonable doubt. I can do that because I've actually done the work George Gascón hasn't.
When you announced your bid for DA at a press conference in April of last year, you compared Los Angeles to Gotham City. Basically, you said that the city and the county were devolving into a “dystopia where lawlessness reigns supreme.” And your critics are saying that that is fear mongering, and that Los Angeles, really, when you look at the facts, is a lot safer now than it has been in the past. When you go back to the ‘80s or the ‘90s, there was a lot more violent crime, a lot more property crime. For example, there were more than 1,900 homicides in 1993 in the county, versus 683 last year. So why did you talk about Los Angeles in this way, in much the way that Donald Trump talks about America?
Well, because I wasn't comparing … Los Angeles County to the ‘80s or ‘90s. I was comparing it to 2014 because, as you're aware, 2014 was considered our safest year in the last 50 years. And what was going right that year? Well the DA was doing her job, it was Jackie Lacey. Law enforcement had a partner in the DA's office, and it was doing its job. Victims understood that if you dialed 911, not only would someone pick up the phone, but you could get justice for the harm you suffered. And as importantly, criminals understood where the lines were. They were being consistently and fairly, impartially and fairly enforced, and there were real consequences on the other side of the line. So in record numbers, criminals that year were not committing crimes, thus saving a whole lot of victims. And that's my goal.
… My goal is not to fill the prisons to the breaking point. My goal, no matter how much George Gascón tries to gaslight people about my intentions, I want to make it crystal clear: I reject mass incarceration as an extreme policy. I reject George Gascón’s decarceration as another extreme policy.
My goal is to achieve deterrence, and deter people from committing the crimes in the first place by adopting a hard middle approach. And the reason I call it hard is you've got to look at each case individually, each defendant, each crime committed, each impact on the victim — to determine who the true threats are to our public safety and have to go behind bars; and quite candidly, the ones that aren't. Your first-time, non-violent offender, if they violate society's laws, have to pay a debt back to society. But that can be a non-prison alternative, be community service, it can be restitution. Pay it back if you stole something. Or if you have a serious drug addiction, it could be a diversion program where you're given a choice, either go to jail or go through an 18-month rehab program, which, if you succeed, we'll give you a certificate and wipe your record clean of that crime. So that's the types of policies that I would advocate to deal with a situation where Los Angeles is witnessing increased criminal numbers.
And that's not me talking. That is the California Department of Justice that has looked at the county-wide numbers over the first four years of George Gascón’s tenure, and found that every measure of crime — violent crime, property crimes, hate crimes, fentanyl poisonings that will kill more 18 to 35-year-olds, and human trafficking — are up single or double digits. Or if it's shoplifting, it's up 133%. So you can call that [an] evolution into a dystopian era. And I'd ask you to talk to store owners who are basically not even calling the police anymore because they know the DA's office won't prosecute the crime. You can talk to homeowners that are watching residential burglaries escalate at a pace at which they never actually experienced. You can talk to the people who won't wear a watch now when they go to an outdoor restaurant for fear it's going to be stolen.
Is that accurate — that crimes are not being prosecuted in LA County to the same level as they were under previous DAs? George Gascón has said that his office has prosecuted 100,000 violent crimes, and that's pretty much on pace with previous administrations. So is that accurate to say that he's simply not prosecuting these crimes? Or is there the state law, Prop 47, which handcuffs him to not prosecute certain crimes as felonies under a certain amount when it comes to retail theft?
He's not prosecuting those crimes. I'll give you a whole list of crimes he's not prosecuting. He has said out loud that if you are a juvenile who steals under $950, it's a misdemeanor.
But that’s under the state law, under Prop 47.
Well, no, you don't understand. You can prosecute misdemeanor crimes. There are 57 other counties besides Los Angeles.
Okay, so you would prosecute all of those misdemeanor crimes?
What I would do is, again, I would adopt the hard middle approach, and I'd look at each case individually. And again, it might be that the punishment isn't to go to jail. It's to do community service. Pay back the money if you stole it from a convenience store. If you have a drug addiction … because you need money to pay the drug dealer, he's not taking credit, yet you've lost your job, you can't get money from your family, you're living out of your car … in those situations with a drug addiction going at full tilt, you're going to … most likely steal or commit crimes to get the money. But if the criminal justice system is used, and it was used for decades before, where they had drug courts, they gave people a choice (either go to jail or go through the rehab program), it became the vehicle for people getting help and actually dealing with the underlying root cause of what is causing them to commit a crime.
Isn't that a false choice? Because there really isn't enough treatment available. There aren't enough treatment beds available. So there really isn’t much of a choice there.
That's not the choice right now. What has happened over the last four years, this is between COVID and George Gascón’s policies, there actually are enough treatment beds as we speak right now. And Gavin Newsom … has allocated literally tens or hundreds of millions of dollars throughout California, including certainly LA County, to build more mental health and treatment beds. So ironically, that is not the problem with the system right now. But I want to make it clear: My job is not to fill the prisons to the breaking point. That, if anything, is the failure of a criminal justice system. My job is to deter the criminals from committing the crimes in the first place, and that will save a whole lot of victims in the process.