News
Government
Jul. 19, 2002
Grand Jury's Speed Alarms Some
LOS ANGELES - The dizzying speed with which prosecutors obtained an indictment against two Inglewood police officers accused in the videotaped beating of a handcuffed 16-year-old mentally disabled boy could soothe an outraged community and garner political points for District Attorney Steve Cooley.
But legal observers, while in agreement that the charges came unusually fast, wondered whether the haste might cause problems for prosecutors as the case proceeds.
Moments after Officers Jeremy Morse and Bijan Darvish pleaded not guilty Thursday to felony charges that could get them three years in state prison, Cooley touted the "unprecedented speed" with which his prosecutors have handled the case, and he did not deny that public outrage was "a factor" in that haste.
"We work for the public, this is their law enforcement system, their justice system, and they have every reasonable expectation that we will utilize the tools available to us in a timely manner," he said. "If we can achieve an accurate result in accord with due process more quickly than later, that's better."
Morris Griffin, a community activist who has participated in regular protests outside Inglewood City Hall since the July 6 beating, said, "I think this was probably the swiftest arraignment ever of a police brutality case anywhere in America."
That speed could cause problems later, some legal observers said.
"I do think this was quick for this kind of a case. And I think it was done to send a clear message that this is being taken seriously," USC law professor Erwin Chemerinsky said. "But I have serious questions about whether this might jeopardize the case down the road."
Loyola law professor Laurie Levenson agreed.
"The public wants answers now, and [the district attorney was] eager not to have this be another Rodney King incident," Levenson said, referring to the infamous videotaped 1991 beating of the unarmed black man by Los Angeles police officers that eventually sparked four days of riots throughout the city.
"But when you move so fast, you sometimes make mistakes," she said. "It's not that [the prosecutors] are stupid and don't know the questions to ask. It's just that sometimes you don't know the right questions because you haven't interviewed all the witnesses."
A speedy grand jury investigation can have its legal benefits for prosecutors, lawyers said. Witnesses' memories are fresh, and they have less time to change or coordinate their stories.
"Sometimes, you trade off speed for thoroughness," Levenson said.
But Connie Rice, a civil rights lawyer who specializes in police abuse cases, cautioned against underestimating the district attorney.
"Of course, [Cooley] was responding to political pressure," Rice said. "He's no fool.
"But I don't think Cooley rushes with paper-thin facts. He usually puts pretty solid stuff together."
Morse was captured on videotape slamming a handcuffed Donovan Jackson face-first onto the back of a police cruiser, then delivering a blow to the side of the teen's face. Morse later said the teen had grabbed his testicles.
Sheriff's deputies initially had questioned Jackson's father, Coby Chavis, about his expired license plate.
They claim Jackson, whose family says he is slow to understand commands, was uncooperative. Inglewood police were called in to help, and Darvish, Morse's partner, admitted in a police report that he struck the youth twice before the tape begins rolling.
Forty-eight hours after the beating, prosecutors brought their first witness in the case to the Los Angeles County grand jury. Over the next six days, 13 witnesses testified before the grand jury. Among those were Jackson and his father, Mitchell Crooks, an out-of-work disc jockey who made the videotape, and deputy sheriffs who were present at the scene. Neither officer who was charged testified, although other Inglewood police officers did.
On Wednesday afternoon, the grand jury handed down an indictment charging Morse with assault under color of authority and Darvish with filing a false police report.
"I've never seen it happen this quickly before," said former Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief David Dotson.
Normally, Dotson said, there's a whole lot of "let's wait and see."
Neither officer was charged with a hate crime even though there were accusations that the officers, both white, targeted Jackson and his father because they are black.
Deputy District Attorney Michael Pettersen, the lead prosecutor on the case, said the grand jury agreed to all the charges prosecutors sought against the officers.
John Barnett, who represents Morse, said another videotape taken by a security camera at a gas station where the altercation occurred might shed more light on the beating. And he predicted his client would be exonerated.
"This isn't the first time that an officer has had his testicles grabbed by a suspect who was handcuffed," Barnett said. "It happened in this case, and that certainly justifies a punch in the face."
Cooley credited the swiftness of the charges to his willingness to use the grand jury and to a protocol he set up in November for police departments to follow when reporting possible police abuse.
"Certainly, a lot of the credit for our ability to move as quick as we did goes right back to the notification and then the decision by our lawyers to move quickly to the grand jury," he said. "If we had not moved this quickly, the most critical evidence in the case could have been lost or compromised.
"And the fact [that there was a] video was really a factor in why we could move so quickly because it does tell a substantial part of the bigger story."
Since taking office 11/2 years ago, Cooley has used the grand jury aggressively, which is not as common in state court as in federal court. The grand jury provides prosecutors with advantages, some lawyers believe.
For one, defense lawyers have no opportunity to question witnesses, to pick apart their stories before trial. That can cut both ways, however, because prosecutors have no opportunity to see their witnesses' weaknesses, lawyers said.
"Using a grand jury, in and of itself, speeds up the process. [There] is no preliminary hearing and the delays [that accompany] that process," Cooley said. "Anytime we can move [along] the process, it's better for the prosecution. Generally speaking, the defense has the advantage with the passage of time.
"That's why you see so many defense lawyers who have made a fine art of the continuance motion."
But Cooley admitted that new facts could surface later, complicating charges that are brought so quickly.
"There's always a problem," he laughed.
"Would we have been able to gather more information, evidence, [and had better] preparation for trial had we not moved as quickly?" Cooley asked. "Perhaps, but the whole process of preparing the prosecution for trial is ongoing.
"There's going to be a lot of work. In fact, there's a lot of work going on right now that I'm aware of, in connection with this case, and it's going to be ongoing. So I don't see the time frame created by going to the grand jury in any way hurting that process."
#337237
David Houston
Daily Journal Staff Writer
davidhouston@runbox.com
davidhouston@runbox.com
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com