LAPD Stays Suspensions of Six Officers

In an unexpected reprieve, a group of Los Angeles police officers who were relieved of duty for not stopping the beating of Rodney G. King began returning to work Friday and will be allowed to remain on the job until administrative hearings are held to determine whether they should be punished.

Earlier this week, LAPD administrators ordered six officers to turn in their badges and guns and forfeit their pay until the administrative hearings can be held--a delay that would have hurt them financially.

But the Los Angeles Police Protective League quickly rose to their defense, demanding their immediate reinstatement because the hearings cannot begin until after the criminal trial against four other officers is completed. The criminal trial, however, is months away.

“We’re most definitely pleased,” said Bill Violante, newly elected president of the police union. “We were concerned about this being an extreme financial hardship on these individuals.

“When you go without pay for a long period of time,” Violante said, “it always creates extreme hardship.”

But Assistant Chief David D. Dotson, who relieved the officers of duty and then allowed them to return to work Friday, said he simply followed a routine LAPD guideline that allows officers to be reinstated if there is a delay in their administrative hearings.

“Despite all the notoriety and all the statements from the Protective League after these officers were relieved of duty,” Dotson said, “they knew all the time that they could petition for reinstatement.

“And they also knew that it is normally granted, that we frequently reinstate officers whose board hearings are going to be delayed.”

In other developments:

* Officer Theodore J. Briseno, one of the four officers charged with criminal assault in the King beating, has filed legal papers in U.S. District Court sharply criticizing Chief Daryl F. Gates for “failing and refusing” to properly train and supervise his troops, and that the chief is unaware of the “proper use” of baton blows and kicks on unruly suspects.

* An Orange County judge ruled that Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Bernard J. Kamins is not biased and can continue to preside over the criminal trial of Briseno, Sgt. Stacey C. Koon, and Officers Laurence M. Powell and Timothy Wind.

* Los Angeles police launched an investigation of the police beating of a South-Central Los Angeles man after an amateur videotape of the 3-year-old incident was broadcast by a local television station.

* The City Council approved Ann Reiss Lane’s appointment to the city Police Commission, giving the five-member panel a fresh slate of members to implement reforms in the Police Department. Lane, a 13-year veteran of the Fire Commission, said her first action as a police commissioner will be to visit police stations and officers in the San Fernando Valley, an area that is unrepresented on the panel.

Dotson, in explaining his decision to return the officers to work, cited petitions filed by the officers in which they demanded open hearings within 10 days, as generally allowed under LAPD policies.

But because Kamins has issued a protective order barring the public release of any police Internal Affairs Division records in the King case, Dotson said it would have been impossible to meet the officers’ demands.

In reinstating the officers, Dotson insisted that they return to work “under very stringent sorts of restrictions.” He said they will perform non-essential support tasks, will have no contact with the public, and that they will be kept under “very careful supervision.”

Department officials have refused to identify the officers who were relieved of duty. However, The Times has learned that the officers who were relieved are Tim Blake, Paul Gebhardt, Joseph Napolitano, Danny Shry, Robert Simpach and Louis Turriaga.

Sources said all but Gebhardt were notified this week that they were being relieved, and therefore were reinstated when they petitioned to return to work. Gebhardt, however, has been on vacation and has not yet been notified, they said.

Dotson acknowledged that one officer has not yet been told of the disciplinary charges against him. But the assistant chief said that, if petitioned, he would “probably” reinstate that officer as well.

In addition, four other officers who were spectators at the King beating were suspended, and another officer was suspended for inappropriately sending personal messages on a police computer shortly before the beating.

Diane Marchant, a lawyer authorized by the police union to represent the officers who were relieved of duty, said she was contemplating legal action had the officers been forced to attend closed board hearings in the near future.

“I’ve just always believed it was grossly unfair to take away an officer’s livelihood until it’s been determined whether misconduct did in fact occur,” she said.

Meanwhile, Capt. James T. McBride, commander of the Foothill Division where the six officers had been stationed, said that the station received numerous calls from citizens this week asking if there was a fund set up to provide financial support to the officers.

McBride said officers at the station were also considering starting a similar fund when the reinstatement of the officers made it unnecessary.

“People realized this was a severe situation,” McBride said. “They were all for letting each man have his day in court, but if it was going to be drawn out (into a several-month delay) it would be a severe hardship. He would lose medical benefits, his house, his car. . . .”

The bystander officers are among numerous defendants in a federal lawsuit filed by King’s attorney. In legal papers in that suit, Briseno, who is also among the four officers charged in state court in the King incident, is alleging that Gates carries much of the blame for what happened that night.

Briseno asserted that he was merely “acting under the color of state law” when he was caught on a home videotape with other officers during the King incident. He added in papers filed July 10 that he “acted pursuant to his training as a police officer with the city of Los Angeles.”

He also filed a cross-complaint against Gates, alleging that the chief does not properly supervise and train officers.

“Chief of Police Gates works during the day and does not work routine assignments at any other hours, nor does he routinely train or supervise his subordinates . . . (thus leaving) sergeants in command of the Police Department when he is not present,” Briseno said.

“Daryl Gates . . . fails to provide qualified and properly trained command personnel to command the Police Department after normal working hours.”

Briseno added: “Gates, who has not attended a formal police academy in many years, has had no recent hand-to-hand combat training in the use of force.” And, he added, the chief “has failed and refused to implement a practical training program and to supervise officers and their supervisors.”

Gates could not be reached for comment. But Lt. Fred Nixon, a department spokesman, said the LAPD would not comment on Briseno’s allegations. “We wouldn’t be interested in responding to that,” he said.

Briseno also filed a cross-complaint against Koon.

“Sgt. Stacey Koon was the sergeant on duty and the highest-ranking officer present at the time and place at which the alleged incident occurred,” he added. “All those police officers were under his supervision and command. Nevertheless, Koon failed and refused to adequately supervise, direct and/or control those officers under his command.”

Koon, who has declined to discuss the case, has maintained through his attorneys that he was acting under LAPD guidelines.

While the civil case is slowly unfolding in federal court, the criminal case is moving ahead and could go to trial this fall. One hurdle resolved was the issue of whether Kamins should remain the judge at the criminal trial.

Orange County Superior Court Judge James L. Smith on Friday denied a request by the officers’ lawyers to disqualify Kamins on grounds he had exhibited bias against the defense.

The defense had complained that Kamins had showed favoritism to the district attorney’s office when he communicated with prosecutors without telling defense lawyers.

“There is no showing that a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that Judge Bernard Kamins would be able to be impartial,” Smith said in a three-page decision.

Several of the defense attorneys said they most likely will appeal the decision.

Times staff writers Michael Connelly, Catherine Gewertz and Ronald L. Soble contributed to this story.

BEATING INVESTIGATED: LAPD begins probe of a beating three years ago that wasvideotaped. B1.