Creating the Rodney King Incident

 

 

There were a number of errors of judgment which led to the Rodney King Affair, the highly publicized and politicized trial of four policemen, the visions around the world that the US has a violent and out of control police force, and the ensuing riot which killed 54 people and did billions of dollars worth of property damage.

Most of those errors of judgment were made by women.

Ninety percent of men believe that women are more emotional than men.  Ninety percent of women agree with them.  Seventy eight percent of men believe that women are more talkative than men.  Seventy eight percent of women agree with them.  Seventy three percent of men believe that men are more aggressive, 59% believe men are more courageous, 52% believe that men are more ambitious, 50% believe that men are more easy-going, and only 23%, 37%, 37%, and 40%, respectively, of women disagree with them.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr010221.asp

So both sexes agree that men have the traits which are important for police work, and that women don't.  Why, then, has this Christian nation permitted women to become police persons--and lawyer persons, and judge persons, and city council persons, in violation of their fundamental religious convictions?   And why do we blame the men who were responsible for this travesty of justice, but never the women?  Why did the world focus only on the four men who were police officers, and the one man who was  police chief (Daryl Gates), and the one man who was mayor (Bradley), while completely ignoring all of the women who, if any one of them had made the correct decision under fire, could have prevented this incident from ever occurring in the first place?

Why did a female highway patrol officer have to chase Rodney King for 8 miles during a "routine traffic stop"?  Brad Gates didn't instruct her to do this, and if he or any other policeman had been present in the first place, this never would have happened.   Why did she draw her gun on Rodney King, an extremely inflammatory and dangerous and almost unprecedented act?   This was in direct conflict with policies which were written and spoken by both Daryl Gates and Mayor Bradley.  Why did a female judge move the trial out of Los Angeles and thus give the world the impression that the government was preparing for a colossal cover up of this trial?  The mostly men judges had never done such a thing for the 25 years prior to this devastating decision.  The women on the Los Angeles City Council who vocally and publicly called for the removal of the choke hold the LAPD had used for years, removed their "night sticks" and equipped them with steel, side-handled batons which can literally kill someone and which even injured many policemen, and refused to issue them the pepper spray they had been requesting for years, yet the media was deathly silent about their role in this riot AFTER it occurred.

Why have policemen been able to operate for centuries without firing 50,000 volt stun guns, twice, at men like Rodney King, and now with women on the police force this has become such a common practice that even judges use the technique to silence men on trial?

Why do oh so magnanimous men refuse to hold female public servants as accountable as they willingly hold men accountable?

The women who were responsible for this incident were never brought to trial, much less were they even criticized, punished, nor even identified.  Instead, they were promoted, while four possibly innocent policemen were imprisoned.  The true irony is that these men were punished for covering for the mistakes of their fellow female police officer.  They were punished because a female cop couldn't do her job, and a female judge made this trial look like a government setup, female city council members refused to acknowledge their roles in this travesty or to even correct their errors, female cops demanded and got stun guns to protect themselves from the people they were hired to protect, and female Attorney General Janet Reno who managed by her own incompetence in Waco and Ruby Ridge to make the US the laughing stock of nations. Who could have guessed that she would make the Tianenmen Square incident in China look like a girl scout outing by comparison?  Who could have guessed that many Americans themselves would place a higher trust on soldiers in China than they do on police in America?

This is a script straight out of Hell.  If the female criminals are not brought to justice and punished for their crimes, the ending will be like one of those described time and time again in the Holy Bible.

 

 

 

 


February 20th

Rethinking Rodney King

A NEW BOOK SUGGESTS THAT THE BEATING
THAT SHOOK AMERICA MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AS
BLACK-AND-WHITE A CASE AS IT APPEARED.

BY LORI LEIBOVICH

It was seven years ago this month that the grainy images were seared into
the national consciousness: a black man struggling on the ground while Los
Angeles police officers stood in a semicircle around him, beating him for 19
brutal seconds. Six years ago come April, in the same city, different
images: angry fists and faces, broken glass and flames, 54 dead, 2,000
injured and a city tearing itself apart before the world.

Ever since, the beating of Rodney King and the ensuing riots have formed a
somber backdrop to America's "dialogue" on race. The beating itself, and the
initial exoneration of LAPD officers by a suburban Simi Valley jury,
supported the notion that America remained a deeply racist society. When
O.J. Simpson was found not guilty, some black Americans said it was "payback
for Rodney King."

But was what we saw on that grainy videotape the whole story? Was the Rodney
King affair as simple and straightforward as we believed? Salon spoke with
Washington Post reporter Lou Cannon, who re-examines the Rodney King case in
his exhaustive new book, "Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots
Changed Los Angeles and the LAPD" (Times Books).

Almost the entire country, along with the federal government, thought the
four LAPD officers convicted of beating Rodney King were guilty of civil
rights violations. But your book casts doubt on the racial motivation of the
beating.

In many everyday incidents, police just move in and hit the suspect. In
cases where you have white officers and a black suspect, it's often safe to
say you've got a racial thing. That was not the case with Rodney King. Here
they chased this guy for eight miles, they had stopped him, a female
California Highway Patrol officer advanced on him with her gun drawn
, which
in the LAPD is considered a very dangerous tactic. Sgt. Stacey Koon of the
LAPD ordered the CHP officer back and he took over this arrest. He then
directed four officers to jump on King. King threw them off his back. He was
sweating on a cold night, it was obvious he was drunk. He pointed at the
sky, he called around, he made strange noises, he waggled his buttocks at
the woman officer, all of these things. They suspected he was on PCP, and
they knew he was strong.

So the LAPD, at least in the beginning, acted correctly?

It's the middle of the night. You have this guy acting very strangely. Koon
did what he was supposed to do under LAPD doctrine -- they fire electronic
darts of 50,000 volts. If you get hit by them, you don't get up for a very
long time. King got up. They fired another volley, he gets up again. As the
second volley is fired
, George Holliday, this amateur cameraman, had his new
camcorder that he was photographing everything with. He had been awakened by
the noises, and the police helicopter and sirens. Just as Rodney King is
charging toward Officer Lawrence Powell, he starts the video. This is the
first three seconds of the video. It is not terribly clear, but it is
obvious what King is doing. It is not clear whether he is trying to run over
Powell, or whether he is trying to run by him to get to this park behind
him. Neither of them knew where he was going -- King was too drunk to know,
and Powell was too panicked to know.

And then we get to the part that has been broadcast around the world, of
Powell swinging his baton.

Yes, Powell swings his baton, not as he has been taught -- in a power stroke
that probably would have flattened King, and this thing would have been over
-- but wildly, and he hits King. The defense thought he hit him in the chest
or the arm. I am convinced he hit him in the head, but Powell was just
swinging. Then the next 10 seconds after this are blurred on the video. They
are blurred because the cameraman moves his camera to try to get a better
view of the situation.

You point out that crucial seconds of the videotape showing King violently
resisting arrest were edited by a local TV news station and then beamed
around the world.

Yes, and it explains why the jurors in Simi Valley, who were from a very
pro-police, conservative community, ruled the way they did. They thought
that the media hadn't told them the full story, and lo and behold, we
hadn't. But in trials, if there is evidence that is damaging to your side,
it's going to come out one way or the other. So lawyers try to present it,
to give their own spin on it before the other side can present it. As the
King trial begins, the prosecutor, who is an African-American, Terry White,
a very fine lawyer, is giving the opening statement. He is showing the jury
this unedited tape. Their mouths are agape. They are saying the mental
equivalent of "ah-ha." So, in his opening statement, White has to explain
away part of the tape, and to describe King as the person who was hostile.
That wasn't the only problem with the trial. King didn't testify, the
prosecution had poor witnesses, the other side had good witnesses. But the
prosecution really never recovered from the videotape.

So was then-Police Chief Daryl Gates right when he called the incident an
"aberration"?

Only in that it was videotaped. Injuries had been mounting before this. The
year before, Los Angeles had paid out more than $11 million in damages, many
of them resulting from settlements. So the city felt confident that if the
King case went to trial that it would be decided in favor of the kinds of
people who had been injured before by LAPD batons -- whites, Latinos and
blacks.

Except -- and this is another major point that you make in the book -- the
trial was moved to Simi Valley.

Yes, but there's another potential misconception here when we use the word
"moved." It wasn't something the prosecution wanted. It came as a result of
a change of venue motion by the defense. And nobody expected an appeals
court to grant the motion. It shouldn't have happened. For 25 years the
appeals court had not been moving or granting changes of venue. They didn't
do it in the Manson murders!

So why did the court do it in this case?

As you know, the King case drew outrage from Paris to Tokyo -- everyone had
seen the tape. But Judge [Joan] Klein -- whom I respect -- had been very
active in Los Angeles politics and thought this hugely controversial case
was hurting the city. But so what?
That didn't have anything to do with
whether or not the defendants could receive a fair trial in Los Angeles! But
she said in her opinion that it should be moved out of Los Angeles, and out
of the local media market.

If the beating wasn't purely racial, it still reflected very badly on the
LAPD.

The police work was terribly negligent. Most people used to think that the
LAPD was a little too rough and ready, but they also thought they were
well-trained and effective. Lawrence Powell, who swung most of the baton
blows, had failed a baton test against a stationary object -- and King
wasn't stationary -- at the beginning of his shift, two hours earlier! If I
had written that in fiction, if I had written a novel, and I had said that
the officer who was most responsible had failed a baton test two hours
earlier, I am sure my editor would have said, "You're relying too much on
coincidence."

You also argue that the city of Los Angeles carries a large share of the
responsibility for the King case.

Yes, the city failed. The city had taken away the choke hold that the LAPD
had used, and equipped them with these weapons -- steel, side-handled batons
-- not a "night stick" or a wooden club. You can literally kill someone with
this steel club. As soon as the LAPD was equipped with these batons, in the
'80s, injuries started to rise, injuries to suspects, and injuries to police
officers. This was pointed out repeatedly to the city council and to Mayor
{Tom] Bradley, but they did nothing about it. After the riots, when the LAPD
asked to equip officers with pepper spray, the council and the police
commission gave it to them in a New York minute. They'd asked for it long
before the riots and had been turned down.

It is easy to say this is the fault of Daryl Gates or Mayor Bradley. But the
fact is, there are a lot of people in the City Council, in the police
command -- Daryl Gates wasn't personally responsible for training Lawrence
Powell -- who failed. If you've been in the Army, you know that incompetence
is as likely to get you killed as bad intentions. These people really did
let down the city, and let down the people in the city they were serving.