Prosecuting a Hideous Crime : Riot Theories Examined in Denny Case

The defense rested its case Thursday in the trial of two men accused of a dozen riot-related charges stemming from a series of attacks on motorists, including trucker Reginald O. Denny.

A UCLA professor who is an expert on riot behavior was the last of nine defense witnesses called to the stand.

The prosecution then began its rebuttal.

Armando Torres Morales, a professor in the UCLA School of Medicine and a licensed clinical social worker, testified before the jury that rioters lose control of their emotions and do things they normally would avoid. He had made the same point earlier outside the jury’s presence. He outlined his theory of “crowd contagion” but was not allowed to equate the theory with the actions of rioters on April 29, 1992, under a ruling by Superior Court Judge John W. Ouderkirk.

Damian Monroe Williams, 20, and Henry Keith Watson, 29, are charged in a series of attacks on motorists as last year’s riots erupted at Florence and Normandie avenues.

Defense attorneys hope Morales convinced the jury that rioters are so out of control that they cannot mentally form the intent to harm others.

The professor also said the emotions unleashed in riots in minority communities are generated by such things as hopelessness and inequality in opportunity and justice.

The judge said Wednesday that the logical extension of the theory is that “no one in a riot would be responsible for any specific intent crime” such as murder or robbery.

Ouderkirk said he based his decision in part on Morales’ admission that he did not interview Williams, Watson or anyone else who was present at the intersection during the riots.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Janet Moore has said prosecutors might call two witnesses in their rebuttal case.

Closing arguments should begin Monday, and the case could go to the jury by midweek, she said.