Judge Offers to Move Trial of 4 Officers

In a surprise reversal, the judge presiding over the case of four Los Angeles police officers accused in the videotaped beating of Rodney G. King has said he is now willing to move the trial out of Los Angeles County to avoid further delays.

Superior Court Judge Bernard Kamins made the offer in a letter to the 2nd District Court of Appeal, dated Monday and made public Tuesday. The appeals court has stayed the trial--which was scheduled to begin today--to consider a change of venue motion by defense lawyers, who say pretrial publicity and local political tensions have hurt their clients’ chances for a fair trial.

Although Kamins asked the appeals court to lift the stay, the court late Tuesday declined to do so, saying only that “there is no need for any action by this court on the trial court’s letter.” That left defense attorneys and prosecutors, who are scheduled to appear before Kamins for a status hearing this morning, wondering what will happen next.

According to the district attorney’s office, the appeals court’s response opens the possibility for Kamins--who had rejected a change in venue--to order the trial moved himself. “It leaves the door open for Judge Kamins to make another ruling,” said Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office. “Whatever is going to happen will happen in court (today).”

Said John Barnett, lawyer for Officer Theodore Briseno: “There is no clear answer to what the Court of Appeal or Judge Kamins is going to do now. We’ll have to wait and see. . . . It will be an interesting morning.”

In a brief, three-paragraph letter to the Court of Appeal, Kamins indicated that he had changed his mind because he wants to move the trial along. He also suggested that the case could be transferred to another county as early as today.

“To avoid further delay in the trial of this matter, this court is prepared to forthwith transfer the venue of this case. . . , “ Kamins wrote. “Accordingly, I request your court to immediately vacate the stay so that this order transferring can be made on or before Wednesday, June 19, 1991.”

Tuesday’s developments were seen as a possible victory by defense lawyers, who said they were encouraged by Kamins’ change of heart. The district attorney’s office, meanwhile, reiterated that they will fight any attempt to move the trial out of Los Angeles County.

“We have said all along, and we still say, that we do not think the trial should be moved to another county,” Gibbons said. “We think that a fair and impartial jury can be selected in this county to try this case and to be fair to both the defendants and the prosecution.”

If the trial is moved, it would mark a rare occurrence in Los Angeles County. Last year, there were seven changes of venue in criminal cases statewide. But the last time a Los Angeles County trial was moved was in 1973, in a case involving the shotgun slaying of a 4-year-old Hawaiian Gardens girl.

Other highly publicized cases--including the McMartin Pre-School, Charles Manson and Night Stalker trials--failed to win changes of venue after defense lawyers complained of adverse publicity. The reason, legal experts say, is that Los Angeles County draws from a vast and diverse pool of 3.5 million potential jurors.

Lawyers for the four officers argue that this case is different because it has generated a dramatic public fallout, including a clash between the Police Commission and Chief Daryl F. Gates, a political tug-of-war between Mayor Tom Bradley and the City Council, and numerous investigations of the Police Department.

The lawyers say that these political developments--combined with intense pretrial publicity that includes the repeated airing of a videotape of the beating--cannot help but influence the feelings of potential jurors.

Although no other trial sites have been discussed, Darryl Mounger, the lawyer for Sgt. Stacey C. Koon, said any county would be preferable to Los Angeles.

“There’s no way we can get a fair trial in the city of Los Angeles because of the political atmosphere here,” Mounger said. “And any potential juror in Los Angeles is certainly influenced by the politics of his neighbors and his friends.”

The four officers--Koon, Briseno, Laurence Powell and Timothy Wind--each face charges of assault with a deadly weapon and of unnecessarily beating a suspect under color of authority in the March 3 beating of King. In addition, Koon and Powell were charged with filing a false police report, and Koon is charged with engaging in a cover-up to conceal the beating, which was witnessed by about two dozen other law enforcement officers.

In a related development Tuesday, legislation to allow police brutality victims to sue both law enforcement officers who abuse them and witnessing officers who fail to report the incident was unanimously recommended for approval by an Assembly subcommittee.

A 4-0 vote sent the measure, which stems from the King beating, to the full Judiciary Committee for another vote. There was no opposition testimony.

The measure would require a law enforcement officer who witnesses another officer assault a citizen during an arrest or while in custody to file a report within 24 hours. Failure to comply could lead to misdemeanor charges and civil lawsuit damages.

“This bill would require law enforcement to fulfill their obligation and rely less on amateur cameramen to expose misconduct,” said its sponsor, Assemblywoman Marguerite Archie-Hudson (D-Los Angeles). “In addition, this bill would help to re-establish more trust in law enforcement.”

Times staff writers Jerry Gillam and Richard A. Serrano contributed to this story.