POST-RIOT WATCH : Venue Reform

The Assembly Public Safety Committee is expected to vote today on legislation to change the rules governing selection of new sites for felony trials when change-of-venue motions are granted. This reasonable bill, by Assemblyman Lloyd G. Connelly (D-Sacramento), should be passed.

Although forged amid the shock and anger touched off by the not-guilty verdicts in the Rodney King case, Connelly’s bill is nonetheless carefully drawn. It is necessary, too.

Judges grant change-of-venue motions when they determine that pretrial publicity makes a fair trial impossible for a defendant in the county where the crime occurred. Such motions are rare.

The bill would not change the rules on whether a trial can be moved; it would, however, impose a new criterion on a judge’s selection of the so-called receiving county. Presently, a judge considers the extent of pretrial publicity there and the degree of hardship caused to the parties or the court in making the move. Connelly’s bill would require a judge to explicitly consider the extent to which a new county demographically resembles the one where the charge was brought. Among the characteristics considered would be race, age, ethnicity and income.

This requirement would help ensure that the verdicts reached in highly charged trials are truly fair and impartial. Like California, other states are weighing change-of-venue legislation that grew out of opposition to the Rodney King verdicts. California must take the lead in achieving this reform. Connelly’s bill should be enacted.