Correspondence: complaints against LAPD, 1978-1991, p. 197 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 197 of 368 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
Grand jury's
Beating Probe
Nearing End
■ Police: Felony indictments considered
unlikely against officers who witnessed
clubbing of Rodney G. King, sources say.
ByLOISTIMNICK
TIMES STAFF WRITER
The Los Angeles County Grand Jury is expected to wind
up its work on the Rodney G. King beating by Tuesday,
with felony indictments unlikely to be lodged against any
of the 17 Los Angeles police officers who watched the
incident but did not intervene, according to sources close to
the case.
The 23-member panel is not expected to add charges to
the indictment returned March 14 against a sergeant and
three officers pictured on a videotape at King's arrest, and
prosecutors have been unable to find any state law under
which to charge the bystanders, the sources added.
Before the grand jury makes a final determination,
however, prosecutors want to examine a request by a local
black lawyers' group to see if the onlookers can be charged
with the crime of "riot" or violating the state civil rights
law, according to Mike Botula, a spokesman for Dist. Atty.
Ira Reiner.
Botula noted that no police officer has ever been charged
by local prosecutors for such violations.
"We want to be satisfied that we have turned every
stone," he said.
Reiner has not said publicly whether the officers who
watched the beating could be charged with a crime by the
grandjury.
Botula said prosecutors are also studying the audio
portion of a videotape of the beating that was made by an
amateur cameraman who lived near the scene in Lake
View Terrace. The audio has been enhanced by the F"BI to
maximize voices and minimize the noise of a> hovering
helicopter to discern if any racial comments may have been
made by officers during the beating.
Although all of the officers interviewed by the district
attorney, including one black patrolman, have denied
overhearing racial slurs, King's lawyer said Friday his
client now remembers hearing such epithets.
"I have not heard a single one of the bystanders say he
heard any racial slurs at the incident," said Diane
Marchant, an attorney who represents 17 Los Angeles
police officers who witnessed the beating. "This is not to
say there were none. . . . There was a helicopter overhead
and maybe you had to be in the right acoustical spot. But
they were all asked, and unhesitatingly, the answer was 'No. "
Four Foothill Division officers
have been indicted for assault and
other charges in the March 3
beating of King. Sgt. Stacey C.
Koon and Offiders Laurence M.
Powell, Timothy E. Wind and
Theodore J. Briseno have pleaded
not guilty and face trial May 13.
The possibility that the grand
jury will not indict any other
officers drew sharp criticism Friday from two local civil rights
leaders.
"They went after the easy targets," said Joseph Duff, president
of the Los Angeles chapter of the
National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People.
"But they're just going through
the motions with respect to the
other people fwho stood by, only
watchingl," Duff continued. "I
haven't seen evidence that they
used the techniques they could
have to make a breakthrough
against the others, such as granting
immunity to some or working on
inconsistencies in their accounts."
Leo Terrell, an NAACP board
member, was equally critical.
"Those who acted by omission are
just as guilty as the four officers,"
he said.
During the second phase of its
investigation, which began early
last month and encompassed five
sessions, the county grand jury
heard testimony from only a handful of witnesses, including four
rookie officers who were at the
beating scene.
Although their testimony is still
secret, transcripts obtained by The
Times of their interviews with
prosecutors show that they were
confused and frightened by what
they saw, assumed that King was
dangerous and possibly high on
alcohol or drugs, and that the
sergeant failed to control the incident.
Marchant said the district attorney's office interviewed 13 of her
clients, subpoenaed eight, but ultimately took testimony under oath
from only four.
"The 17 I represent are all
working and available," she said.
"Why they stopped at four they
didn't tell me, but given the possibility that the transcript will be
published, maybe they felt it would
be too helpful to the defense for the
four" officers charged earlier.
She also suggested that the current grand jury may want to leave
the matter for consideration by
next year's grand jury, which convenes July 1. ,
Object Description
| Title | Correspondence: complaints against LAPD, 1978-1991 |
| Description | Newspaper clippings (Los Angeles Times, L.A. Weekly, Los Angeles Daily News, New York Times, Sentinel) and magazine articles (U.S. News & World Report, Newsweek) documenting Los Angeles Police Department misconduct under Chief Daryl F. Gates, 1978-1991, compiled by Irving Kessler and Lynn F. Kessler. Includes: Introduction, Contents, Excessive force, Rodney King, Mexican nationality, Civil rights, Property, Silence, Discrimination, Accountability, Gates intolerance, Recommendations. PART OF A SERIES: Materials in the series fall into one of several categories related to the Independent Commission's work product: (1) Commission meeting materials, which include meeting agendas, work plans, memoranda, and articles about police misconduct that were circulated and reviewed during the Commission's internal meetings; (2) public correspondence, which includes citizen complaints against the LAPD in the form of written testimony, articles, and an audio cassette tape, as well as letters drafted by citizens in support of the LAPD; (3) summaries of interviews held with LAPD officers regarding Departmental procedures and relations; (4) public meeting materials, which include transcripts, supplementary documents, and witness statements that were reviewed at the Commission's public meetings; (5) press releases related to the formation and work product of the Commission; and (6) miscellaneous materials reviewed by the Commission during its study, including LAPD personnel and training manuals, a memorandum of understanding, and messages from the LAPD's Mobile Digital Terminal (MDT) system. |
| Coverage date | 1978/1991 |
| Creator |
Kessler, Irving, compiler Kessler, Lynn F., compiler |
| Publisher (of the original version) | Los Angeles Times; L.A. Weekly; U.S. News & World Report; Los Angeles Daily News; New York Times; Newsweek; Sentinel |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California, USA; Washington, DC, USA; New York, New York, USA |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California |
| Date created | 1991 |
| Date issued | 1978/1991 |
| Type |
texts images |
| Format | 368 p. |
| Format (aat) |
clippings (information artifacts) articles summaries |
| Format (imt) | application/pdf |
| Language | English |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Part of collection | Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, 1991 |
| Series | Independent Commission File List |
| File | Complaints, suggestions, and support |
| Box and folder | box 23, folders 7-9 |
| Provenance | The collection was given to the University of Southern California on July 31, 1991. |
| Rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ All requests for permission to publish or quote from manuscripts must be submitted in writing to the Manuscripts Librarian. Permission for publication is given on behalf of Special Collections as the owner of the physical items and is not intended to include or imply permission of the copyright holder, which must also be obtained. |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Repository name | USC Libraries Special Collections |
| Repository address | Doheny Memorial Library, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189 |
| Repository email | specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Filename | indep-box23-07_09 |
Description
| Title | Correspondence: complaints against LAPD, 1978-1991, p. 197 |
| Format (imt) | image/tiff |
| Physical access | Contact: Special Collections, Doheny Memorial Library, Libraries, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0189; specol@dots.usc.edu |
| Full text | Grand jury's Beating Probe Nearing End ■ Police: Felony indictments considered unlikely against officers who witnessed clubbing of Rodney G. King, sources say. ByLOISTIMNICK TIMES STAFF WRITER The Los Angeles County Grand Jury is expected to wind up its work on the Rodney G. King beating by Tuesday, with felony indictments unlikely to be lodged against any of the 17 Los Angeles police officers who watched the incident but did not intervene, according to sources close to the case. The 23-member panel is not expected to add charges to the indictment returned March 14 against a sergeant and three officers pictured on a videotape at King's arrest, and prosecutors have been unable to find any state law under which to charge the bystanders, the sources added. Before the grand jury makes a final determination, however, prosecutors want to examine a request by a local black lawyers' group to see if the onlookers can be charged with the crime of "riot" or violating the state civil rights law, according to Mike Botula, a spokesman for Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner. Botula noted that no police officer has ever been charged by local prosecutors for such violations. "We want to be satisfied that we have turned every stone," he said. Reiner has not said publicly whether the officers who watched the beating could be charged with a crime by the grandjury. Botula said prosecutors are also studying the audio portion of a videotape of the beating that was made by an amateur cameraman who lived near the scene in Lake View Terrace. The audio has been enhanced by the F"BI to maximize voices and minimize the noise of a> hovering helicopter to discern if any racial comments may have been made by officers during the beating. Although all of the officers interviewed by the district attorney, including one black patrolman, have denied overhearing racial slurs, King's lawyer said Friday his client now remembers hearing such epithets. "I have not heard a single one of the bystanders say he heard any racial slurs at the incident," said Diane Marchant, an attorney who represents 17 Los Angeles police officers who witnessed the beating. "This is not to say there were none. . . . There was a helicopter overhead and maybe you had to be in the right acoustical spot. But they were all asked, and unhesitatingly, the answer was 'No. " Four Foothill Division officers have been indicted for assault and other charges in the March 3 beating of King. Sgt. Stacey C. Koon and Offiders Laurence M. Powell, Timothy E. Wind and Theodore J. Briseno have pleaded not guilty and face trial May 13. The possibility that the grand jury will not indict any other officers drew sharp criticism Friday from two local civil rights leaders. "They went after the easy targets," said Joseph Duff, president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People. "But they're just going through the motions with respect to the other people fwho stood by, only watchingl," Duff continued. "I haven't seen evidence that they used the techniques they could have to make a breakthrough against the others, such as granting immunity to some or working on inconsistencies in their accounts." Leo Terrell, an NAACP board member, was equally critical. "Those who acted by omission are just as guilty as the four officers," he said. During the second phase of its investigation, which began early last month and encompassed five sessions, the county grand jury heard testimony from only a handful of witnesses, including four rookie officers who were at the beating scene. Although their testimony is still secret, transcripts obtained by The Times of their interviews with prosecutors show that they were confused and frightened by what they saw, assumed that King was dangerous and possibly high on alcohol or drugs, and that the sergeant failed to control the incident. Marchant said the district attorney's office interviewed 13 of her clients, subpoenaed eight, but ultimately took testimony under oath from only four. "The 17 I represent are all working and available," she said. "Why they stopped at four they didn't tell me, but given the possibility that the transcript will be published, maybe they felt it would be too helpful to the defense for the four" officers charged earlier. She also suggested that the current grand jury may want to leave the matter for consideration by next year's grand jury, which convenes July 1. , |
| Filename | indep-box23-08-01~49.tif |
| Archival file | Volume77/indep-box23-08-01~49.tif |
