Los Angeles Police Officers' Trials: 1992 & 1993

The verdict rocked Los Angeles. Within hours the city erupted in rioting that left 58 people dead and caused $1 billion in damage. In the aftermath of this tragedy the U.S. government filed charges of civil rights violations against the four officers.

Prosecutors Barry F. Kowalski and Steven D. Clymer faced an uphill task when the second trial began in Los Angeles on February 3, 1993: convincing a jury that the officers had deliberately intended to deprive Rodney King of his constitutional rights. But first they had to select that jury.

The absence of black jurors in the state trial had kindled a firestorm of criticism, but on this occasion a more ethnically diverse panel was selected. In his opening argument, Clymer declared "Rodney King is not on trial." "The issue of whether he was guilty or innocent that night is not the issue in this trial. What we will tell you is that while he was being beaten while he was on the ground he didn't kick a police officer, he didn't punch a police officer, he didn't grab a police officer, he didn't injure a police officer."

Confirmation of this came from Dorothy Gibson, an eyewitness. "He [King] was lying on the ground, face down with his hands stretched out like a cross shape." Another eyewitness, Robert Hill, described hearing King scream in pain as officers beat him.

Sergeant Mark Conta, an expert on police procedure with the LAPD, condemned the tactics used. "It is my opinion that it was a clear violation of Los Angeles police policy." Conta singled out Koon for special criticism. "He should have stopped this and should have taken care of his officers when they needed him most."

Following the first trial it was widely believed that the prosecution had miscalculated by not putting King on the witness stand. On this occasion he did testify and made an effective witness.

Describing his actions to Kowalski, King said, "I was just trying to stay alive, sir." King admitted that he had responded defiantly when the officers began baiting him, chanting, "What's up, nigger? How do you feel, killer?" "I didn't want them to know that what they were doing was getting to me—I didn't want them to get any satisfaction." He described the baton blows as feeling "like you would get up in the middle of the night and jam your toe … on a piece of metal. That's what it felt like every time I got hit."

Throughout a grueling day of cross-examination, King did much to dispel earlier defense depictions of him as a menacing brute. Even when defense attorney Michael Stone drew an admission from him that he had lied to investigators when he denied driving drunk on the night of the beating, King managed to salvage the situation, saying that, as a parolee, he had been afraid of being returned to prison.

Another defense team member, Harland W. Braun, hammered away at King's varied and contradictory versions of events that night, implying that King had appended the assertions of racial epithets to enhance his civil suit against the city of Los Angeles. "You can become a rich man," said Braun, suggesting that King stood to gain $50 million in the suit.

King did admit to a faulty memory: "Sometimes I forget things that happened and sometimes I remember things," conceding an uncertainty about whether the taunts leveled at him had actually included the word "nigger." "I'm not sure. I believe I did hear that." In earlier grand-jury testimony, King had made no mention of racial slurs.

Braun was incredulous. "As an Afro-American who admittedly was beaten, you would forget that police officers called you nigger?… The fact is that you were trying to improve your case or lawsuit and really didn't care about the impact it would have on anyone else!"

The assault was continued by Paul DePasquale, attorney for Timothy Wind, who also highlighted King's hazy recollection of events by referring to an interview in which King had erroneously claimed that he was handcuffed all through the beating. Despite these inconsistencies, Rodney King left the stand largely undiminished and having impressed the majority of those present.

In a strange turn of events, officer Melanie Singer was again called, this time for the defense, but the content and manner of her testimony yielded a bonanza for the prosecution. Defense attorneys could only stand aghast as she tearfully condemned their clients' conduct. It was a devastating setback.