Witness Discounts Mob Rule : Denny case: Witness disputes defense claim that riot behavior is spontaneous. He says chaos allows predatory people to commit violence without fear of being caught.

Even in mob situations, individuals have the ability to make choices for themselves, a University of Texas criminologist said Friday, the last day of testimony in the trial of two men accused of trying to murder trucker Reginald O. Denny.

“The group cannot make you do what you are not predisposed to do in the first place,” said Paul E. Tracy, who teaches at the university’s Dallas campus.

Tracy was called to rebut a defense witness who explained the theory of “group contagion,” which holds that individuals in a mob often behave impulsively and without thought.

Over the years, the group contagion theory has been “discussed and discarded” by most mainstream sociologists, Tracy said.

“The group, especially when it is behaving in an unruly way, provides an opportunity for people who behave in a predatory way,” he said.

Because there is so much frenzy, Tracy said, a “perceived anonymity” results, making people feel that they “can get away with violent acts that they normally couldn’t get away with.”

On cross-examination, the defense challenged Tracy’s credentials as an expert in crowd behavior. Tracy acknowledged that he had written no articles on the topic and was not one of the leading experts in the field.

Attorney Edi M.O. Faal, who represents defendant Damian Monroe Williams, asked if the 1831 slave uprising led by Nat Turner could be seen as an example of how a group could alter the behavior of individuals.

“It’s not the group that made them do it,” Tracy responded. “It’s a group of individuals, similarly situated, who make a free choice to go along with the behavior that is happening.

“Collective behavior is a concept. I’ve never seen collective behavior, only the behavior of individuals,” he said.

Earlier this week, the defense called Armando Torres Morales, a psychotherapist and professor at the UCLA School of Medicine, who said that actions in a riot are dictated by group contagion and are purely spontaneous.

That theory would rule out the specific criminal intent necessary to prove the most serious charges against Williams: attempted murder and aggravated mayhem.

Williams also is charged with assault and robbery in connection with several attacks, including the one on Denny, that occurred at Florence and Normandie avenues on April 29, 1992, the first day of the Los Angeles riots.

His co-defendant, Henry Keith Watson, is charged with the attempted murder of Denny and with assault and robbery.

After Friday’s testimony, Superior Court Judge John W. Ouderkirk told the jury that they had heard all of the evidence and that he would instruct them on the law.

Those instructions could come Wednesday after both sides present closing arguments Tuesday. Monday’s session will be devoted to arguing--outside the jury’s presence--what instructions the panel should be given.

After the jury was excused Friday, attorney Earl C. Broady Jr., who represents Watson, asked Ouderkirk to dismiss two robbery charges and the attempted murder charge against his client. Ouderkirk denied Broady’s motion and a motion by Faal to dismiss three counts against Williams of assault with a deadly weapon.

During a recess Friday, Ouderkirk set a Nov. 9 trial date for a third man accused in the attack on Denny and others at Florence and Normandie. Antoine Miller, 21, initially was charged with Watson and Williams, but was later granted a separate trial.