Policeman’s Mother and Ex-Officer Accepted for Jury Pool in King Case : Trial: Two court clerks also are placed on the tentative panel. All say they have seen videotape of incident but can hear evidence fairly.

The mother of a police officer, two court clerks and a former peace officer were accepted Monday for the tentative jury pool in the trial of four Los Angeles policemen charged with beating a black motorist.

All four of the prospective jurors said they had seen the videotaped beating on television but could put aside their opinions to hear evidence in the case.

“It was upsetting to see somebody hit like that,” said the officer’s mother. But she said she believes force is justified in some situations.

The woman said she had not discussed the case with her son, a Los Angeles police officer.

A woman who is a Ventura County court clerk and once worked in the district attorney’s office said she was shocked when she first saw the videotape and thought, “It doesn’t look good for the defense.”

“It didn’t look good to me,” she said. “All these police officers were beating up on one person. . . . They looked guilty to me.”

But she insisted that she could put aside any opinion she formed last year when the video was first shown and believed she did not know all of the facts.

The defense sought to have her dismissed, but Superior Court Judge Stanley Weisberg refused, saying, “I believe she can truthfully be impartial.”

The four defendants sat taking notes during the fourth day of juror questioning. They showed no reaction when two jury prospects denounced their behavior as “inhuman” and said they used “excessive force.” Those panelists were dismissed.

Sgt. Stacey C. Koon, 41, and Officers Timothy E. Wind, 31, Theodore J. Briseno, 39, and Laurence M. Powell, 29, are charged with the March 3, 1991, beating of motorist Rodney King.

The beating was videotaped by a neighborhood resident and its broadcast sparked national outrage against police brutality.

The judge is seeking a pool of about 130 prospective jurors from which to choose the final panel to judge the case. About half of more than 130 quizzed so far have been excused because of bias or hardship.

The former peace officer who said he worked for the U.S. Forestry Service was accepted for the tentative panel even though he said he had training in the use of a baton and had taught defensive tactics at a federal law enforcement academy.

He said he believes force is necessary to arrest some people but on the videotape “it just looked like (King) was hit too many times. . . . My perception was once the individual was on the ground, why didn’t it stop then?”

He said he believed he had not yet heard all the facts involved in the King beating.

Outside court, Deputy Dist. Atty. Terry White said he did not challenge the man’s qualifications as a juror because “he understands the use of force, escalation and de-escalation and he sounds like he could be fair.”

As for a large number of jurors who have said they formed no opinions from viewing the tape, White said he was not surprised.

“Some people clearly have reactions but don’t have opinions,” he said. “I believe anyone who watches that videotape is going to have some kind of reaction.”

Only three prospective jurors said they never saw the tape.