Brief Argues Against Moving Trial of King Case

The judge in the Rodney G. King case should be allowed to try to impanel an impartial jury in Los Angeles County before other locations are considered, the judge’s lawyer argued Monday in a brief filed with a state appeals court.

Opposing a defense motion for a change of venue being reviewed by the 2nd District Court of Appeal, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Bernard J. Kamins said he plans to ask prospective jurors about their reaction to the widely viewed videotape of the March 3 police beating of the Altadena motorist, their attitudes toward police and racism, and whether they could set aside preconceived notions and decide the case solely on the facts.

If, after jurors fill out a lengthy written questionnaire and are interviewed individually, it becomes apparent that the four Los Angeles police officers indicted in the beating cannot get a fair trial here, Kamins said he would then send the case elsewhere, or bring in jurors from another county.

Assistant County Counsel Frederick Bennett, who wrote the brief on behalf of Kamins, said the appellate court’s intervention is “premature.”

Bennett acknowledged that pretrial publicity has been pervasive. However, he said, “most of the media coverage has been focused away from the actual facts of the case and is directed at political squabbles.”

The King beating has spawned a public outcry largely directed at Police Chief Daryl F. Gates. Mayor Tom Bradley has called for Gates to step down. And the city Police Commission and City Council have tangled over who, ultimately, has jurisdiction over the Police Department.

Defense attorneys for the officers claim that the political controversy swirling about the King case is precisely what sets it apart.

Jurors will be asked not to consider the political aspects, but rather “whether or not the defendants are guilty or innocent of three interrelated charges: assault with a deadly weapon (batons and feet), excessive force and drafting false police reports,” the brief noted.

Bennett’s brief gives Kamins’ rationale for sending a letter to the appeals court last week offering to relocate the trial to avoid months of delay.

He said the judge believes that California voters, as well as the state Legislature and the Judicial Council, have made it clear that they want speedy trials and that, because of the city’s large and diverse population, there is no need to move the trial.

The trial had been scheduled to begin last week, but the appeals court halted all proceedings, saying it wanted a complete review of the venue issue.

Prosecutors also filed a response to the appeals court Monday, agreeing with Kamins that the trial should remain in the county and noting that many prospective jurors live outside the jurisdiction of the battling mayor, police chief, Police Commission and City Council.

Defense attorneys have until July 12 to reply to the briefs filed Monday.