by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 26, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

etting another black eye, the Los Angeles Police Department was caught on videotape beating an African American suspect after a high speed chase, ending when officer John J. Hatfield kicked and struck 36-year-old Compton resident Stanley Miller 11 times, even after the suspect appeared “proned-out,” spread-eagle face down. Hatfield called the beating “distraction blows,” needed for submission. Since the widely publicized 1991 Rodney King beating and 1996 Rampart Police scandal, the LAPD signed a federal consent decree, requiring sweeping changes in police tactics and accountability—including police brutality. Calling for an investigation, LA Mayor James K. Hahn and Police Chief William Bratton acknowledged the growing maelstrom. While Hahn was City Attorney, he authorized over $100 million in payouts to the law firm of Johnnie L. Cochran, largely on police misconduct claims.

      Watching the present controversy unfold, city officials find themselves walking a dangerous tightrope. If they condemn the act, they expose the city to growing liability and prejudice future criminal and civil legal actions. Yet failing to condemn the actions incites the Black community, already at the boiling point over other incidents of police brutality. Only two years ago, Inglewood police officer Jeremy Morse punched and slammed 16-year-old Black Inglewood teenager Donovan Jackson's head into his police car. Morse's first police brutality trial ended July 28, 2003 in a hung jury. A second trial also ended the same way Jan. 31 2004. “There's no denying that it looks very bad from what is seen on the video,” said Bratton, saying the right things yet hedging his bets. “But there should be no rush to judgment before the investigation is completed,” reserving judgment pending more facts.

      Bratton's remarks, while an improvement over former LAPD police chief Darrell Gates, whose public comments following the Rodney King beating exacerbated racial tensions, create a dissatisfying déjà vu in the African American community. It was, after all, the LAPD officers' acquittal April 29, 1992 by a White jury in Simi Valley that triggered the most violence since the 1965 Watts' riots. During the King incident Gates “was quick to defend officers. He almost implied Rodney King deserved it [referring to the beating],” said Los Angeles Urban League president John Mack, giving Bratton higher marks for reaching out to the Black community. Even former mayor Tom Bradley couldn't stop the racial combustion in 1992. “The community is watching. They'll hold us accountable. This is a test,” said Hahn, concerned that the Miller incident could get out of hand.

      New reports suggest that least two officers thought Miller possessed a firearm. Hatfield, a seven-year LAPD veteran, claimed he beat Miller with his flashlight to subdue him for handcuffing. Yet the video shows Miller pinned down while Hatfield wailed away. News that officers believed Miller possessed a dangerous weapon opened up a plausible excuse to what otherwise looked like obvious police abuse. Radio transmissions, during the car chase, indicated “furtive movements,” implying the suspect was arming himself. Other reports indicated that Miller clutched something in his left hand, possibly a weapon. It turned out to be eight dollars in cash. Whether making “furtive movements” or “clutching” something doesn't warrant pummeling suspects once they're pinned down for handcuffing. Possessing wire cutters, or other non-weapons, doesn't justify excessive force.

      Under LAPD policy, officers are permitted to administer “distraction blows” to subdue noncompliant suspects. Before LA Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley makes his determination, the LAPD already tipped its hand about Hatfield's defense. Faced with a dangerous suspect resisting arrest and possibly possessing a dangerous weapon, Hatfield was justified beating Miller into submission. Cooley declined to file criminal charges and must ascertain whether Hatfield's tactics crossed the line into police brutality, or, more simply, battery under-the-color-of-authority. “This decision does not mean that charges will not be filed,” said Cooley, examining the evidence before jumping the gun. Before filing charges Cooley must determine whether there's enough evidence to warrant prosecution and possible conviction. So far, the LAPD has floated a barrel of exculpatory explanations.

      Whether Cooley files charges or not, the LAPD once again cost the city embarrassment and, yes, hard-earned tax dollars. Miller's attorney Mark Werksman didn't buy the LAPD's probable-cause theory, excusing Hatfield's conduct as exemplary police work. “I am demanding an explanation,” said Hahn at a City Hall news conference, trying to stem growing outrage in the African American community. “It better be a good one. It looks to me that force was unwarranted,” appointing a special committee of high-profile community leaders to monitor the police abuse investigation. Hahn's decision shows keen political instincts during an upcoming election year, where he attempts to consolidate support in the Black community, shaken after not renewing the contract of former police chief Bernard C. Parks, ironically now a city councilman and candidate for mayor.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.