Fear and the Power of the Videotape

The theme that I found abundant in chapters 15-18 of Lou Cannon’s Official Negligence is the influence that fear had on the entire federal trial of the four officers. Even before the trial started, when the jury was beginning to be selected, the Los Angeles Times ran a story that gave a sort of ultimatum to those involved with the legal process. The story declared that riots would more than likely continue and worsen if these police officers escaped with acquittals again. Cannon uses specific statistics to exemplify this point, stating that only 6.3% of the roughly 6,000 people who were invited to the “undisclosed” trial never acknowledged the invitation. People in Los Angeles wanted nothing to do with the Rodney King trial because of the obvious explosive nature of the situation. It had already gotten out of hand, and nobody wanted to be responsible or accountable for any difficult decisions that may ensue.

Cannon’s argument in these chapters is to show the reader that the “humanization” of Rodney King to the jury throughout the trial and fear of the jurors are the reasons why Laurence Powell and Stacey Koon were found guilty. Cannon takes special care to document King’s testimony, in which he clearly made efforts to press the issue of race in the case. Cannon also discusses how King’s mild nature and general courtesy during his time being examined allowed him to truly state his case to the jury that he is an innocent man who was unjustly beaten.

It was very interesting to read about how the federal trial of the four police officers, with a video documenting the beating they administered to Rodney King, could contain so many ambiguous facts and accounts of the night. Thus, it is very important for Cannon to show the connection that King made on an emotional level with the jury. Because he was able to demonstrate to them that he is not out of control, the fact that there were so many different stories about the night forces the jury to make their own decisions based on what they “feel” happened. The defense always seemed to fall back on L.A.P.D. policy as the reason why the officers acted the way that they did. Despite this, the prosecution was consistently able to appeal to the moral values of the jurors and depict a man on the ground being bludgeoned time and time again.

One of the most important themes in Cannon’s account is the power of the videotape. It is easy to assume that since there is a videotape, there is really no reason for a trial because all of the facts are unquestionable. However, Cannon demonstrates that the videotape only shows one side of the story. That happened to be the side of the prosecution. Cannon writes, “The videotape’s one dimensional record omitted almost every action exculpatory to the defendants except the King charge while including every action that was damning… Koon’s perceptions were similarly honest and consistent, but his record of the incident existed only in his mind” (Cannon 450). For all that we, the reader, knows, Rodney King could have been shouting threats at the officers and could have actually been on PCP and a serious danger to the defendants, but the video only shows the opinion that he was an innocent man who was the victim of a racist attack.

New York Times: First Five Articles Published After the Rodney King Incident

Rodney King is a 25-year-old black man who was severely beaten by the police.  It is reported that he was driving close to 115 miles-per-hour, however this aspect is disputed by the director of public relations at Hyundai, Bill Wolf, who argued that Hyundai automobiles are incapable of even coming close to that speed.  This is one of many comments in the first five New York Time articles published after the incident that cast a shadow of doubt on the values of the Los Angeles Police Department. 

For example, there are multiple quotes by people who talk about how Rodney King was so brutally beaten, including a description of all of his gruesome injuries.  For example, King’s doctor, a man who has no specific monetary gain to be had out of supporting his patient, declared, “It is a horrible, horrible, brutal beating.”  The news stories are littered with evidence that the mayor of Los Angeles wants the police chief Daryl Gates to resign, so that the city of Los Angeles can begin to restore its confidence in its police men and women.  While there are myriad instances that the writers of the New York Times quote sources that defend King, Gates does not seem to be given the same fair chance.  The only quote he is awarded with regard to the public attacks on his job credibility is when he says, “No,” when confronted with the question of whether he will relinquish his post or not.  It is clear that the newspaper is attempting to reveal the inadequacies of the police department and make Rodney King out to be a victim.

The writers do not offer Gates and other police officers the same chance to defend themselves as King is given.  On many occasions throughout the stories, King is portrayed as a man who has done nothing wrong.  It is very rarely referenced that he has an arrest and jail time for armed robbery on his record.  When reporting occurrences between King and the police after the initial beating, King is described as “frightened and anxious” and apologetic about having to ask for police protection.  The New York Times makes it the audience believe that he is paranoid about his awful experience with police just months earlier.  He is called an “unresisting motorist” in the articles, and the newspaper attempts to employ the technique of Logos, where they appeal to the reader’s sense of reason.  An example of this is one of the first times that race is brought up in article four.  The writing makes the L.A.P.D. out to be completely and overtly racist in a way that Judge Kamins, a member of the Superior Court, has never seen before: “I feel that race could be part of the motive here… To say that these comments aren’t racially biased is like sticking your head in the sand.  This is probably the first trial in which I will allow racial questions.  I feel it’s a significant and relevant thought in the case.”  The reports go on to elaborate on more and more racial issues within the police department, forming public opinion to believe that the L.A.P.D. is a wildly corrupt institution and Rodney King is simply an innocent man driving a car who is the victim of the police department’s weaknesses.

Biases of Journalism in Official Negligence

Lou Cannon’s writing in his book, Official Negligence, is almost entirely in a narrative fashion.  Cannon turned his introduction of every character into a story about that person to give more background and context to whom the individuals were who participated in the beating of Rodney King.  Specific examples are on page 5 with Tom Bradley and also on page 40 with the description of Rodney King’s past.  The narrative bias that Cannon utilizes in his book helps to give a make the characters more personable to the reader.  Readers are naturally interested in stories with beginnings, middles, and ends, especially when controversy and conflict is involved.  Cannon does a very effective job of making the reader develop a more personal connection with the players in the book through offering individual details of each character’s life.

Cannon exhibited a bad news bias as well in his writing.  Specifically, on page 17, he discussed the rising crime rate in the mid-1980’s that stretched the L.A.P.D. thin at a time that they were already undermanned.  This is an example of the American public believing that good news is boring and bad news is more exciting.  Cannon’s illustration of the rising crime rate in L.A. and how it may have indirectly influenced the culture in which the Rodney King incident occurred seems to be placed in his story to keep the interest of the audience.

It was interesting to hear how the news stations admitted to purposely editing tape in order to maximize the interest of the audience (page 23).  For example, they cut out the first ten seconds of the Rodney King beating in order to avoid a blurry segment, but in turn deleted the part where King charges the police officers, blatantly resisting arrest.  Without this portion, all the audience sees is King being pummeled on the ground, not making any moves toward the officers at all.  This is a clear example of commercial bias, where the newsmakers do what they can to maximize profit from the audience by creating the most interesting, exciting, and newsworthy product that they possibly can.

The police officers exhibited an example of syllogism in their assumption that king was on PCP at the time of his arrest.  They thought that since King was acting strangely, and people on PCP act in the same manner as King was that night, then King must be on PCP.  This seems to have been an influence in the police’s decision to beat him incessantly, since apparently PCP users are oblivious to pain.  Due to this syllogism, in which the police made an assumption based strictly on observation, the entire nation was able to witness the brutal beating of Rodney King.

Some of the eyewitness accounts that Cannon included in his book perform the technique of pathos, in which the story attempts to appeal to the sense of emotion of the reader.  For example, on page 24, Chief Gates describes the officers’ actions in detail, discussing how terrible, uncalled for, and incredulousness of the entire Rodney King incident.  Through Gates’ description of the “fifty-six times” that King was beaten, the audience is led to empathize with King and blame the police for their actions that night.

I felt that Cannon’s use of narrative in his writing was his most effective tool in capturing my attention as a reader.  I had read the account of the Rodney King incident in the New York Times articles, but once I could relate to the characters upon learning all of their backgrounds and true identities, I was literally drawn into the excitement of the story.  

The New York Times and the Beating of Rodney King

With very little prior knowledge of the Rodney King beating and subsequent trial in 1991, I was shocked as I read the New York Times news articles describing the event.  The level of police brutality that was illustrated by the writings seems outrageous, especially coupled with the fact that all of the officers on trial were acquitted of their charges. 

What I found most interesting as I read these articles for the first time was the way in which the newspaper seemed to take a definitive side in the argument as to whether the severity police beatings were appropriate or not.  Instead of simply reporting the facts of the case and then presenting both sides of the argument, I found myself being convinced by the writings that the officers certainly showed excessive force.  Having never seen the video, I can not actually give my opinion as to whether the beatings given to Rodney King were inappropriate, but, from reading the New York Times, I definitely feel influenced to side with King’s supporters and believe that the police were in the wrong on March 3, 1991.  I feel that the newspaper simply illustrated the opinions and side of those outraged by the police’s actions much more than those who defended the way in which the officers acted.  Had the articles presented the arguments of those who felt that Rodney King got what he deserved more, I don’t know whether I would feel so strongly that the police were out of line.

I think that the reason that the New York Times may have decided to report more on the supporters of Rodney King than the police is that it is certainly the safer and more politically correct side of the argument to take.  It is much easier to attack the party that is accused of excessive force than it is to try and reason to the masses that Rodney King deserved to be hit 56 times.  By siding with the safer opinion, the writers of the New York Times had a hand in influencing people like myself that the Rodney King beating was certainly an example of outrageous police brutality.

I also was intrigued to read how the incident of white police officers beating a black man who they allegedly believed to be a threat developed into a battle of race in the United States instead of a battle between the police and the citizens of the nation.  I feel that both are definitely issues in this particular instance, but the response after the acquittal was focused so much more on whites vs. minorities than on the police and its abuse of power vs. the suspects and citizens they are arresting. 

The impact of the Rodney King beatings in 1991 is that it shed light on a serious problem not only in the L.A.P.D. but most likely also in police departments across the country.  This is the first episode of severe police brutality caught on camera, and it certainly opened the eyes of the nation.  It is interesting to see how such an important issue only comes to light once it is caught on camera by chance.

I am interested to see the video of the Rodney King beating so that I can actually formulate my own opinion as to whether the police officers in question used excessive force or not.  Before watching the witness’ film, I am certainly inclined to feel that they did.