Editor’s Note: This column is part of a series that features lessons learned from past incidents that are still relevant today. This is part one of two features on incidents that occurred in the 1990s. Read more of Eric Dickinson's "Lessons By the Decades"
Following an eight-mile high-speed chase on March 2, 1991, California Highway Patrol and Los Angeles Police Department officers attempted to subdue Rodney King, the driver of the vehicle who was later found to have alcohol and PCP in his system, through the use of Tasers and batons. A video surfaced of the incident, showing the officers beating King with their batons, which ignited public outrage. The incident was met with riots and looting in the city of Los Angeles and resulted in 53 deaths and more than $1 billion in damages. In the wake of more recent public outrage and riots over the shooting death of unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown by a Ferguson (Mo.) PD officer, the Rodney King incident provides many lessons about public perception, the use of force and the detrimental effects of rushing to judgment.
The Incident
During the early morning hours of March 3, 1991, the California Highway Patrol attempted to stop a speeding car on Interstate 210 in Los Angeles. The driver of the car, Rodney King, led officers on an eight-mile high-speed pursuit that continued onto the city’s surface streets and required the help of multiple LAPD officers. When the pursuit ended, the two passengers in the car with King quickly complied with commands and were taken into custody. King, however, refused to follow commands and was acting erratically when he finally exited the car.
Sgt. Stacey Koon assumed command of the scene and directed LAPD officers Laurence Powell, Timothy Wind, Theodore Briseno and Rolando Solano to perform a technique known as a “swarm” where officers attempt to control each of a suspect’s four limbs and direct the suspect to the ground. King was forced to the ground where he then kicked off all four officers. Based on their training and experience, the officers believed that King was under the influence of PCP.
At the time, the less lethal option carried by LAPD patrol officers was the PR-24 side-handle baton. Some LAPD patrol sergeants, including Koon, also carried an early Taser device manufactured by Tasertron. Sgt. Koon fired the Taser at King, who was taken down by the device but got back up. Sgt. Koon fired a second pair of probes at King, who again fell but didn't stay down. King stood and ran toward Officer Powell, colliding with him. Powell defended himself with several baton strikes, knocking King back to the ground.
As verbal commands to lie prone continued unsuccessfully, Sgt. Koon directed two officers to strike King with their PR-24s in the hope of gaining compliance from King. King was struck with batons on the arms, legs and torso. In addition, several kicks were delivered when King repeatedly tried to stand up. Additional officers had arrived on scene and they were finally successful in taking King into custody utilizing a second swarm. King was taken to a hospital where an emergency room physician diagnosed King’s condition as “PCP overdose” and his injuries as “facial lacerations, superficial.” His blood alcohol content was determined to be .19.
A nearby resident, George Holliday, witnessed the incident from his balcony. He captured 82 seconds of the incident on his home video camera, beginning just after the second use of the Taser by Sgt. Koon. The following day, Holliday took his videotape to an LAPD station and offered to give them the video for use in training. Personnel working the front desk declined Holliday’s offer. Holliday then took the video to a local television station.
The Response
Holliday’s recording swept across multiple media outlets nationwide within a couple days. The video had been edited down to only a few select seconds that were played repeatedly out of context and without the full story of what had occurred that night. Department administrators joined the media and public in a chorus of outrage over an incident that was portrayed from the outset as blatant police brutality.
Sgt. Koon and Officers Powell, Briseno and Wind were criminally charged in California state court with assault with a deadly weapon and use of excessive force. During the trial, the defense showed the entire Holliday video and broke down the events it portrayed into great detail. After seven days of deliberations, the jury returned its verdict on April 29, 1992. Koon, Briseno and Wind were acquitted of all charges. Powell was acquitted of the assault, but the jury deadlocked 8-4 toward acquittal on his charge of excessive force. Widespread rioting began across Los Angeles resulting in 53 deaths and more than $1 billion in property damage. Smaller related riots and protests also broke out in various other cities across the U.S.
The four officers were then charged in federal court with violating King’s civil rights. Wind and Briseno were acquitted again. Koon and Powell were convicted and each sentenced to 2½ years in prison. In his verdict, the federal judge stated that only the “approximately last six baton blows were illegal.” The judge noted there were no intentional strikes to King’s head, King was resisting arrest and that the federal trial did not constitute double jeopardy but “raised the specter of unfairness.”
Lessons Learned and/or Ignored
• Public perception: Right or wrong, the aftermath of this incident forever changed how the public perceives law enforcement use of force, ethics and minority relations. This was the most widely viewed use of force video ever seen at that time and many in the public were shocked at how ugly the use of force can appear, even when lawful. Educate key members of local government, the media and your community on the realities of use of force and the investigative process.
• Use of force: Gain control of combative suspect(s) quickly and effectively if you have the manpower and tools to do so. According to use of force expert John Bostain, the longer an incident drags on, the greater the chance of injuries to both suspect and officers, and the greater the level of force will be required to resolve the incident. Less lethal options and physical control tactics need to be readily available and practiced frequently in order for officers to maintain proficiency.
• Value of video: Selective editing of this video helped convince the public that the officers used excessive force, but the full video helped acquit the officers involved. At the time of this incident, law enforcement did not have the wide range of video and audio recording options that are available today to record the officer’s perspective. Now, many officers make use of both car and body mounted video cameras and nearly every citizen’s cellphone can record video. Remember that video is still hampered by the fact it is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional event and may not clearly show the entire story.
• Avoid the rush to judgment: In the event of a public outcry over a use of force incident, department administrators have to resist the urge to join the chorus of criticism and allow the investigative process to reach its conclusion before passing judgment on the officers involved.
Below 100: Three of the five tenets of the Below 100 Initiative apply to this incident:
• Watch your speed: Once a pursuit is over, avoid rushing the suspect vehicle. Use cover and time to your advantage. Slowly bring the suspect(s) back toward you if possible.
• W.I.N.: What’s Important Now is to gain control of the suspect(s), if necessary, through the lawful use of force. After a use of force incident, provide access to medical care if needed, secure evidence of the incident–such as photos, videos, etc.–and write detailed and truthful reports.
• Remember, Complacency Kills: Always be ready with alternatives in the event your initial plans or tactics to control a combative suspect are ineffective.
References
Gates, DF, Shah, DK. Chief: My Life in the LAPD. Bantam Books. New York,1992–1993.
Koon, SC, Dietz, R. Presumed Guilty: The Tragedy of the Rodney King Affair. Regnery Gateway, Washington D.C., 1992.