Police State & Federal Trials
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In April, 1992, the four Los Angeles Police officers accused of beating Rodney King were acquitted, touching off the most destructive civil unrest in United States history. Most Americans were mystified by the juryÆs verdicts, wondering how 12 people could fail to convict the four officers who had been captured on video tape beating King. The next year, the officers were tried againùthis time in federal courtùand two were convicted. For most Americans, unfamiliar with the subtleties of the law, this appeared to violate the officersÆ constitutional right not to be subjected to ôdouble jeopardy.ö This paper will attempt to explain both quandaries, examining why the officers were acquitted in state court and convicted in federal court, and then explaining why the federal trial did not violate their constitutional rights. The stateÆs case suffered a major blow before the trial even began when the Court of Appeals ordered the proceedings removed from Los Angeles County. The defense had asked for the change of venue, arguing that the enormous pretrial publicity would prevent their clients from getting a fair trial in Los Angeles County. Judge Stanley Weisberg denied their motion, but the Court of Appeals reversed. In the eyes of many, WeisbergÆs next decision is the one that sealed the fate of the prosecution. Instead of moving the case to another county with similar demographics (such as San Francisco or Alameda), Weisberg moved the case to Simi Valley in neighboring Ven
. . .
ve BrisenoÆs testimony, in which he declared that at some point, Powell went too far and he tried to stop him. Ultimately, BrisenoÆs testimony did not hurt the defense, at least not at this trial.
Having been seriously wounded, the prosecution mounted a rebuttal case. They called Commander Michael Bostic, the head of the LAPDÆs use of force review board. But he proved to be less than an effective witness, undone by technical questions, boring answers, and a lack of field experience. As the defense pointed out on cross-examination, Bostic had never actually had to make a decision in the field when to end the use of force (Cohen, 1992).
In closing arguments, the prosecution finally began to show emotion, but too little, too late. They played the video and asked the jury: ôWho you going to believe? Them or your own eyes?ö Instead of making an emotional appeal, the prosecution lapsed into legalese: ôWhat would a reasonable police officer do in this situation?ö Plus, the prosecutors made two fundamental errors: They challenged the defense to show the video tape in its entirety (which the defense happily did), and district attorney Terry WhiteÆs attempt at theatrics backfired when the judge rebuked the prosecutor for walk
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Green United, Timothy Wind, Rodney King, Ventura County, Conta LAPD, Michael Bostic, Abbate Court, Rodney Kings, King Cohen, Police Department, video tape, los angeles, federal court, cohen 1992, los angeles county, angeles county, police officers, district attorney, cannon 1998, powell et, civil rights, powell et al, described events video, king cohen 1992, united powell et,
Approximate Word count = 2312
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Police State & Federal Trials
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
