Historic Criminal Case: Restoring Social Order Research Paper

Introduction

Cases can be broadly divided into two groups namely, criminal cases and civil cases. A criminal case arises where the government acts as the prosecutor and seeks to punish the offender for acts that either the state legislature or the congress law classifies as a crime (Kelly, 2009). On the other hand, civil cases arise from disputes between persons or persons and organizations where one subject feels that his rights have been violated as pertains to an agreement or a contract earlier reached. A criminal case involves the breaking of a law that governs the whole state unlike the civil case where the law broken is only applicable to the subjects in the conflict. In that regard, a criminal case draws harsher penalties to the convict. In criminal laws, government lawyers represent the suspects i.e. if the suspect cannot afford to hire a lawyer. According to Kelly (2009), the suspect is found guilty if the prosecutor is able to prove the offense reasonably. The punishment may include a fine, incarceration, or both. If a convict feels that justice has not been done, he is entitled to a jury trial. Where the suspect has committed the civil and criminal case, the state may criminally prosecute him, or he may be civilly sued for damages. The main aim of the criminal case is to restore social order by punishing the wrongdoers and deterring further criminal acts.

Background: Rodney King’s Beatings

Rodney Glen King was born in Sacramento, California on 2nd April 1965, and in 1991, he became a victim of police brutality (Linder 2001). The incident was videotaped by an eyewitness from a good distance and the footage showed clear pictures recorded of the officers from the Los Angeles Police Department beating an unarmed Rodney King with their batons. The news agencies aired the beating worldwide and this generated tension between the white and the black communities. Social inequalities and police brutality were brought to focus and became the debate for a considerable period of time. In 1992, the officers accused of the beating were arraigned in court and later acquitted an act that sparked the 1992 Los Angeles riots. A federal trial for the case later found two officers guilty; they were incarcerated while the other two were acquitted.

The Incident

On the second march of 1991, Rodney King and his friends Freddie Helms and Bryant Helen had spent the previous night watching basketball while drinking together. After the game, they drove along the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles with Rodney King as the driver. At around 12.00 pm their speeding car was spotted by the Los Angeles traffic officers Tim and Melanie singers (The Oregonian, 1991). They gave a chase to the car with the speed reaching up to 100 mph. King, at this point, drove off the highway and instead got into the residential streets and the police remained hot on his tracks.

Later, the police stated that King’s speed on the residential streets ranged between 55 and 80 mph. As the pursuit went on, more police cars joined in the pursuit, and in the final stages of the chase, a helicopter too joined to provide air support. Finally, Rodney was cornered. In the car were other occupants including Rolando Solano, Timothy Wind, Stacy Koon, Theodore Briseno, and Laurence Powell.

A highway patrol officer, Tim Singer ordered the car’s occupants to get out and lie on the ground with their faces facing down. Freddie Helms and Bryant Helen obliged the orders and were taken into custody peacefully. However, Rodney King refused to comply with the orders and instead stayed inside the car and when he came out he first giggled, patted the ground, and then started waving at the helicopter. King then obliged with the earlier orders and lay on the ground but he resisted being handcuffed. He tossed the officers trying to handcuff him and the police were ordered by their patrolman to fall back taking it that the king was under the influence of phencyclidine (PCP), a dissociative drug that is believed to give humans a superhuman strength, the result later was negative of the drug (Linder, 2001). Sergeant Koon, one of the officers then shot King with a taster, knocking him to the ground and leaving him groaning.

Videotaping of Rodney King’s Beatings

While still on the ground Rodney king lunged towards Officer Powell as George Holiday, an eyewitness began videotaping the incident. The movement of King towards Powell could not be substantially confirmed as intended for attack or an attempt to getaway. Immediately, by using his baton, Officer Powell started striking King and the first blow, according to the video footage hit King on the head sending him sprawling to the ground. The wind then joined Powell in the beating and Koon was heard yelling to the two officers to hit him on the wrists, joints, ankles, knees, and elbows. Despite the beatings, Rodney King persistently tried to get up to no avail. The video footage recorded 56 batons of ‘power strokes’ and sidekicks after which the officers cord cuffed and handcuffed Rodney thus restraining his hands and legs (Linder 2001). All this happened under the watchful aperture of George Holliday’s camera from his apartment situated at the intersection of the Osborne street and the Foothill Boliuvered. Interestingly, Holiday’s camera recorded the incident without his knowledge. When he contacted the police, the officers ignored him then he decided to get into contact with the media.

The Post Arrest

Rodney King was rushed to Pacifica hospital after this incident where he was found to have suffered a broken right ankle, a number of lacerations, and bruises. When his blood sample was tested for alcohol content, it indicated that he was over-intoxicated to drive under the prevailing Californian laws. His teeth indicated traces of marijuana but no other illegal drug was found in his blood sample.

Demand for Justice

When George holiday took the videotape at the KTLA Los Angeles television station, the news producer found the videotape worthy of a news item and was subsequently aired on the evening news. The following day the Cable News Network (CNN) took up the tape and broadcasted the tape all over the world. The CNN president later said that the media station used the tape as wallpaper (Linder 2001). An opinion counts immediately after the news revealed that 92% of the respondents were of the view that excessive force was used while dealing with Rodney King.

According to Reis (1995), the incident was initially taken as racial abuse but when Powell’s ‘Gorilla in the mist’ message was revealed this opinion changed. A commission was appointed to investigate the practices of the LAPD and give recommendations for reforms.

The four officers hired attorneys who focused on moving the hearing from Los Angeles County, but the defense motion was rejected by judge Bernard Kamins on May 16, 1992. Later, the California court of appeal granted the defense counsel their plea to have the hearing relocated outside Los Angeles County, and in the process judge, Bernard Kamins was withdrawn from the case after being accused of being biased by the appeal court. Judge Stanley Weisberg has reassigned the case and to the interest of the defense counsel, he re-scheduled the trial on the Simi Valley, a white-dominated settlement in Ventura County (Reis, 1995). The prosecutors were however aware of the consequences of the relocation of the case and sensed a looming unfairness in the judgment.

The Trial in Simi Valley

The selection of the jury was significant to the outcome of the trial and both the defense counsel and the prosecutor knew this well. The jury comprising of 260 people only had just a handful of black Americans. The hostility of the territory in which the trial was scheduled added more discomfort to the black Americans. The juror, in this case, had a history of being pro-law enforcers with some of them previously being members of the National Rifles Association. Two other jurors were comprised of retired military officers and as a result, the jury was largely a pro-police assembly due to the background of the individuals. With this point in focus the chief prosecutor in the case, Terry White who was an African- American raised complaints and was not sure that the prosecution side could successively prove their argument against the police officers (Reis, 1995). On the other hand, the head of the defense counsel termed the jury as a ‘gem of the jury’. The median did not emphasize the importance of proper representation in the prosecution and rather was sure that the tape would provide reliable evidence against the perpetrators.

The trial started with the chief prosecutor playing the tape, an action which he repeatedly did throughout the trial. The main witness in the trial was Melanie singer, the highway patrol officer. Rodney king could not testify since it was argued that doing so would make him prone to cross-examination about previous criminal offenses in addition to the fact that he was too drunk to recall exact details of the incident. When Singer narrated how King was repeatedly beaten by the police officers, he was asked by the jury if there was enough reason at the moment for him to be subjected to the beatings. He replied that in his opinion there was not enough reason for doing so.

The prosecution mostly depended on the messages they obtained from the statement made by Powell that illustrated him as a callous man. A Los Angeles police officer then testified about Powell’s message to a fellow officer after the beating. The nurse at the pacific hospital then testified about the conversation between King and Powell at the hospital (Reis, 1995). It was also reported that Powell had told King that they had won while King had lost. So far the evidence heard was against Powell and King and save for the information in the tape there was no evidence against Wind.

It was then the turn of the defense witness to testify and Koon, being the first witnesses, said that he had identified King as a dangerous man who on first impression appeared as if he was on PCP. Koon implied that the force used against the suspect was warranted and was not out of control. Sergeant Charles Duke seconded Koon that reasonable force was used to restrain the suspect. He stated that the reaction by the police officers was as a result of the banning of the choke heads by the LAPD leaving the police officers with no alternatives of handling dangerous suspects other than by using force. He stated that sometimes breaking a bone is necessary and he seemed to imply that the 56 strokes of batons were justified (Linder, 2001).

While testifying Powell stated that he was fully scared of King and was aware that if King arose he would take the gun from him. Powell finally stated that everybody at that time was responsible for his or her actions. It was then the turn for Theodore Briseno to testify and he produced excellent testimony material for the prosecutors. When asked about his stomp on King’s shoulders he said that it was meant to cool King and thus stop other officers from clubbing him. He summed up the incident as a controlled and well-managed cover-up affair. Attorney Michael Stone said that Powell, his client, was a dutiful man who always stood his ground. Mounger defending his client Koon said that he was working with inexperienced officers and therefore he had no option. The jury discussed the matter for seven days and the judgment was reached. All the police officers were acquitted (Linder 2001).

The aftermath of the Verdict

In less than two hours of the acquittal, riots were held all over Los Angeles. King watched in disbelief as the verdict was passed and states, “that the jury had denounced a crime what the world regarded as a crime”. The riots turned into racial battles with black youths against anything owned by the whites. Whites motorists were harassed by the demonstrating black American youths. Five days later the riots were quenched leaving 44 people dead. President George W. Bush promised a prosecution to the police officers on his may 1st address to the citizens (The Oregonian, 1991).

The Second Trial

On February 25 1993 and in the District Judge John G. Davie courtroom of Los Angeles, the second trial of the four officers commenced again. The justice department formed a strong four-person committee to try the now closely followed case. Headed by Steven Clymer, the best trial lawyer in the United States was the prosecution committee. The new jury formed comprised of fairly racially mixed people, unlike the Simi Valley jury. Two blacks were nominated as jurors despite the resistance from the defense side. This became the main problem with the defense, focusing much on the removal of the black jurors. The prosecution side is now prepared at the expense of the defense confusion. They brought King on the witness stand accompanied by a health expert who successfully proved that the scars were caused by being continuously stroked with a baton. The prosecution also avoided the witnesses whose testimonies had backfired in the previous trials. Mark Conta, an expert in excessive use of force was used to disapprove the defense witness (The Oregonian, 1991). Conversely, King was taken by the jury as having been too drunk to remember facts rather than as a liar each time he told conflicting information.

The issue of race was also brought up by King who stated that the officers were shouting ‘what’s up nigger’ when beating him. The defense witnesses, who were the police officers, changed their previous positions on being fearful among other issues to the advantage of the prosecutors. Particularly Koon appeared as an arrogant man. Powell refused to take a stand; Theodore was a witness only on the tape. Again the videotape was shown by the prosecutors and the defense counsel appealed for the verdict not to be under the influence of the state.

The case was given to the Jury on April 10, 1993, and after six days the panel of the jury came to an agreement. James Holmes Read, the court clerk read the verdict on 17th April 1993 at seven o’clock to minimize riots (Linder, 2001). The jury found Koon and Powell guilty. They were sentenced to 30 months in state-federal camps while Wind and Theodore were set free. The prosecutors were victorious and the attorney of the US justice department stated that the judgment was fair moreover the public commended the judgment and no riots were reported.

References

Douglas L. (2001). Famous Trials: Rodney King’s Beating Trials. Web.

Kelly, D.M. (2009). What Makes A Case A Criminal Case? Web.

Linder, D. (2001). The Trials of Los Angeles Police Officers’ in Connection with the Beating of Rodney King. Web.

Reis, L.N. (1995). The Rodney King Beating: Beyond Fair Use. The John Marshall’s Journal of Computer and the Information Law. Chicago: John Marshall Law School. 13 (2).

The Oregonian (1991). Web.