LA County Human Relations Commission Pushes for Info on Investigation Into Gemmel Moore’s Death

Gemmel “Juelz” Moore (left) and Ed Buck (Facebook)

The Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission has pressed the Sheriff’s Department for information about its investigation into the death of Gemmel Moore and requested the assistance of the West Hollywood City Council in getting that information.

Moore, a 26-year-old black gay man, was found dead of a methamphetamine overdose on July 27, 2017, in the Laurel Avenue apartment of Ed Buck, a then 63-year-old white gay man who was known for his donations to Democratic Party candidates and his advocacy for animal rights. Evidence emerged in an investigation of Moore’s death that Buck had recruited young black men to do illegal drugs with him.

The L.A. County Coroner’s Office originally ruled Moore’s death an accident due to a drug overdose. Pressure from members of Moore’s family, black activists, WeHo City Councilmember Lindsey Horvath and L.A. Councilmember Mike Bonin led to the Sheriff’s Department opening an investigation into the death. The L.A. District Attorney in July declined to prosecute Buck, saying there was insufficient evidence of his guilt from the investigation. The Coroner’s Office reported drug paraphernalia in Buck’s apartment. A copy of Gemmel Moore’s diary, also found in the apartment, included a statement from him saying that Buck had paid him to inject methamphetamine into his body. Buck, through his lawyer, has denied the allegations. Buck was discovered to have posted a solicitation for young black men on a gay sex hookup site several weeks after Moore’s death. Neighbors in Buck’s building at 1234 Laurel Ave. have told WEHOville that young black men continue tso visit Buck, although the purpose of their visits is unclear.

In a letter to Sheriff Jim McDonnell and the WeHo City Council, the Human Relations Commission raised the following questions:

–Did LASD conduct a formal interview with Ed Buck related to potential criminal conduct beyond any statements made on the evening of Gemmel Moore’s death?

–What was LASD’s determination as to whether Ed Buck engaged in criminal conduct in his private residence at any point in time within the applicable statutes of limitations?

–How many witnesses were interviewed by LASD alleging illegal conduct by Ed Buck within the applicable statutes of limitations?

–How many witnesses providing potentially relevant evidence about illegal conduct by Ed Buck were offered immunity?

A response from McDonnell dated Oct. 10 and signed by Stephen Johnson, chief of the department’s detective division, answered some but not all of those questions. Johnson said that Ed Buck had refused to be interviewed by detectives. He did not say how many witnesses were interviewed or how many provided possible relevant information about Buck’s behavior. He also did not answer the Human Relations Commission’s question as to the Sheriff’s Department’s own determination as to whether Buck had engaged in criminal conduct during the period covered by the state’s statute of limitations. In California, prosecutors have three years to bring charges against someone on a drug-related crime.

“Homicide detectives interviewed witnesses willing to provide statements, while other were reluctant to be interviewed,” said Johnson, who acknowledged providing limited immunity to some potential witnesses who might have feared being arrested for admitting they had engaged in prostitution or drug use.

Johnson said that “numerous written and social media accounts presented disturbing information regarding this case.” However, he added, “very little could be used without firsthand information being obtained.”

Mayor John Duran disturbed members of Moore’s family at a meeting in August 2017 when he discouraged escorts from coming forward with evidence about possible illegal behavior by Buck, who has been a donor to Duran’s political campaigns. Duran, who is a lawyer, said that witnesses could be prosecuted if they didn’t get a promise of immunity, and that that might require the expense of hiring a lawyer. Councilmember John D’Amico, whose initial election in 2011 was heavily promoted by Buck, is the only one of several Council members who responded to requests from black activists to return Buck’s campaign donations. He made  a donation of $25 to a Go Fund Me campaign created by Moore’s family. Buck donated a total of $1,000 to D’Amico’s two campaigns, $500 for the 2011 campaign and $500 for the 2014 campaign.

The Human Relations Commission’s Sept. 27 email to the West Hollywood City Council asked that the Council assist it in getting answers to the question it posed to the Sheriff’s Department, with which the city contracts for public safety services. It asked that the Council take up the request at its Oct. 1 meeting. It was not, however, on the Council’s public agenda nor was it on the agenda for its closed session on that date.

In its email, the Human Relations Commission said its questions arose from a public hearing on policing and human relations that was specifically geared to hearing from women and the LGBT community.


4 Comments
  1. Hear, hear! This whole case STINKS of corruption, incompetency, and basically payoff because the alleged perp was White and rich. There is all kinds of material online in the history of this case that seems to point to some kind of scenario where Buck paid young, vulnerable Black men, who needed the money badly, to inject more, and more, and more methamphetamine, just to see “what it would do to them”, and he got off on watching what happened in some kind of sexual thrill that fetishized overdose, and led up to and including the victim’s death, like some kind of Dr. Mengele-style crude experiment to satisfy a bizarre sexual fetish, where the victims were among society’s most vulnerable (young, Black, poor, desperate). This scenario, if true, would point to a manslaughter scenario. This case should be THOROUGHLY investigated, and the victim’s plight not just swept under the rug as the death of yet-another pathetic junkie just because he was young, Black, and poor, and the alleged perp relatively RICH and White. If Buck is cleared after a thorough investigation, so be it, but have the investigation first. I would like to know more of why this scenario doesn’t constitute manslaughter in this type of bizarre sexual fetish play gone bad.

    1. Agreed. But I’m afraid it is probably too late, from an evidence perspective. Whatever was there, is probably not there, anymore. And they’ll have a difficult time proving that Buck was responsible for this. What they did within the first 24 hours was a critical point, and that time is lost.

      I do not believe the City Council members were involved in any type of conspiracy or cover up, however. I think Buck was a contributor to liberal causes, and Council Members are being dragged through the mud by their political association with him. Just because they took political donations does not mean they were involved in any sort of cover up.

      I think the LASD works too autonomously, with little oversight, and that is part of the problem (refer to the 939 Palm shooting situation).

      All that said, more needs to be done here. I, unfortunately, see nothing coming out of this. And I’m appalled that he was back online, looking for young black men, shortly after this awful incident.

Comments are closed.