Preparing for King Verdict Gains Urgency

As the city’s most volatile civil rights trial speeds to its conclusion, a new urgency swirls around questions of how to handle a potentially explosive outcome: Should the judge impose a highly unusual delay on the reading of the verdicts? Should there be a massive show of force on the streets, and if so, when? And could the city move to delay the spring election if unrest breaks out?

A spokesman for Mayor Tom Bradley disclosed Thursday that the mayor, Police Chief Willie L. Williams and Gov. Pete Wilson have had repeated discussions about postponing the verdicts with representatives of U.S. District Judge John G. Davies, who is hearing the case of four police officers accused in the beating of Rodney G. King.

Cardinal Roger M. Mahony has also called for a delay, asking that the verdicts not be issued during the upcoming spring breaks for public and private schools so that educators can discuss the outcomes with students and help vent any hostile feelings. Councilman Nate Holden has called for a reading of the verdicts at 3 a.m., when instigators would find it more difficult to mobilize forces for an insurrection.

Short delays are common in trials, usually because it takes time for the parties to get to the courthouse for the reading of the verdicts, and one federal judge, speaking anonymously, said it was his understanding that Davies would delay announcement of the verdict for just three hours.

But a longer delay would be highly unusual, and community activists and legal experts questioned the wisdom of imposing such a wait.

“The people in the community can get edgy hypothesizing what’s happening. It’s like the unknown is worse than the known,” said Loyola University law professor Laurie Levinson, who has been an observer throughout the trial.

A substantial delay might “feed the rumor mill,” said Gerald F. Uelmen, dean of the Santa Clara University Law School. The rationale for requesting a delay would be to allow police time to deploy in what is expected to be a massive show of force. While some preparation is called for, Uelmen said, “rolling out squad cars will give the impression of a not guilty verdict,” he worried.

Postponing the reading of the verdicts is well within the powers of the judge, according to several legal experts. The postponement issue has been before Davies for weeks, since a request from defense attorney Ira Salzman, but he has yet to rule on the matter.

There is no accepted procedure for government officials to formally ask the judge to mandate such a delay, said Assistant City Atty. Byron Boeckman. Because of that, the city has not made a formal legal request for a postponement.

“The federal judges run their own shop,” Boeckman said, “and they may listen to political requests, but its their call. . . . It is one of those quirky little things: political consideration for a judge to decide.”

The accelerated interest surrounding the verdicts came as defense attorneys brought their case to an abrupt conclusion Thursday, creating the possibility that the case will go to the jury by next week.

Bradley is on a four-nation European tour, and has not altered his plans to return to the city on Saturday. Aides said that will put him back in City Hall in plenty of time for the outcome of the civil rights case.

Meanwhile, despite calls from leaders to keep the civil rights trial out of the political theater, the proximity of the verdicts to the April 20 municipal election brought the trial into the political debate.

City councilman and mayoral candidate Joel Wachs called for a declaration of a state of emergency before any trouble begins, so that National Guard forces can be deployed.

“These are extraordinary times and extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary responses,” said Wachs. “We cannot afford to wait for trouble to break. We have to send a clear and unambiguous message.”

But an array of other officials--including Bradley’s top aide and the head of the Police Commission--derided Wachs’ proposal as political opportunism.

“It’s the kind of proposal that encourages violence because it predicts it,” said Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), one of a host of mayoral rivals slamming Wachs. “This crosses the line from decency to demagoguery. He’s trying to tap into the people’s basic fear, and exploit it to the nth degree.”

Deputy Mayor Mark Fabiani and Police Commission President Jesse A. Brewer said a comprehensive response to the King verdict has been in the works for months and that eleventh-hour posturing by others will do nothing to enhance preparations or to calm the city.

“The mayor would prefer to have (Police Chief) Willie Williams, not Joel Wachs, in charge of the city’s emergency planning,” Fabiani said. “Chief Williams has already worked extensively with the National Guard and the National Guard forces and equipment will be within easy reach of the city, if needed.”

Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas, who represents a South Los Angeles District heavily damaged in last year’s riots, simply called Wachs’ plan “headline-hunting.”

The key to the Police Department’s plan will be to have a large number of uniformed officers on the streets from the moment the King jury begins its deliberations, Fabiani said. Those stepped-up patrols will continue through the jury’s delivery of a verdict, he said.

Police officials have declined to deliver more specifics about the number or location of officers to be deployed.

In addition, National Guard forces will be in the region this weekend for regular training exercises, but with a particular emphasis on tactics for putting down urban unrest.

“The mandate this weekend is to hone their skills in the civil disturbance mission,” said Lt. Col. Bruce Roy, a Guard spokesman. But Roy added that the guard has also moved four armored personnel vehicles into a Glendale Armory to protect soldiers in a “high-threat environment” if needed.

But Ridley-Thomas and others warned against preparations going too far.

“There is a line between repression and responsible preparedness,” he said. “This armed-to-the-teeth orientation is unsettling. I think it has more of a destabilizing effect than the effect of imposing calm.”

Meanwhile, city officials have begun to plan for how unrest could affect the April 20 municipal election. The head of the city’s Election Division has requested an opinion from the city attorney’s office about Bradley’s power to postpone the election, if trouble could interrupt voting.

The mayor is given an array of emergency powers under the City Charter, including the power to impose a curfew, but it is unclear whether this extends to elections, said Kris Heffron, head of the elections division of the city clerk’s office.

And on Wednesday , the city’s emergency operations officials contacted the Los Angeles Convention and Visitors’ Bureau to make sure that a sufficient number of hotel rooms would be available for law enforcement personnel in the event of a protracted deployment.

Large employers were also laying plans.

At Arco, for example, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Lodwrick M. Cook recently sent a letter to more than 1,500 area employees outlining the company’s plans if and when verdicts spark violence. While Arco declined to release a copy of the letter, company spokesman Al Greenstein said the communication was aimed at assuring employees the company is ready with security measures.

“We don’t anticipate a riot. We are not telling employees there will be a riot,” Greenstein said of the March 25 letter. “We are simply telling employees the steps we are taking to ensure their safety. It is simply emergency planning just as we do with earthquakes or other emergencies.”

Times staff writers John Schwada, Greg Krikorian and Patrick J. McDonnell contributed to this story.