Denny Juror Says Riot Fears Did Not Influence Verdicts : Courts: Forewoman defends decision. But alternate who did not deliberate says panel condoned violence.

Fear of another riot played no role in verdicts reached in the Reginald O. Denny beating trial, the forewoman of the heavily criticized jury said Monday, but the lone alternate assailed the verdicts as an indication that “we are ruled by intimidation from a small group of people.”

In verdicts handed down piecemeal last week, the jury acquitted Damian Monroe Williams and Henry Keith Watson on the most serious charges and found them guilty of less severe offenses stemming from attacks on Denny and others at Florence and Normandie avenues as rioting broke out April 29, 1992.

“There has been a lot of expressed anger, shock, disbelief and speculation regarding the verdicts,” said the forewoman, reading a statement on behalf of all 12 members of the panel. “The verdicts were decided according to the law, not through intimidation, fear of another riot, nor were the verdicts based on black versus white.”

The forewoman and the alternate, who did not participate in deliberations, spoke at a news conference where they took no questions from reporters. Jurors asked Superior Court Judge John W. Ouderkirk to keep their identities and places of employment confidential and the judge agreed to do so.

The forewoman, an African-American woman who appears to be in her 30s, said the verdicts “were based on the evidence and facts presented in court. We followed the judge’s instructions and all 12 of us understood the law as presented to us.”

Saying the verdicts did not result from “any outside influences or considerations,” the forewoman, known only as Juror 431, said: “We do not condone what happened at Florence and Normandie. However, we the jury feel confident that we did the best job possible given the evidence and the applicable law.”

The forewoman’s comments echoed those of another juror who appeared in a television interview last week with her face obscured and her voice electronically altered. Ouderkirk said Monday that several jurors had indicated a willingness to be interviewed and are free to do so. After reading her statement, the forewoman said she would be contacting several news organizations to be interviewed.

Five members of the original jury were replaced for various reasons--two after deliberations had begun--and Juror 188, a white woman in her 40s, was the only alternate not seated on the panel.

“It is a sad day in America and for the human race when we are ruled by fear of retaliation from a small group of people, not by what is right and wrong in God’s eyes,” the alternate said.

“It seems we as a society have deteriorated to a preschool mentality that it is all right for everyone to do what is right or wrong in her or his own eyes. The message the jury sent out basically is that if you don’t believe or agree with a verdict it is OK to go into the streets to choose certain fellow human beings, throw rocks at their cars, beat them up and take their property. All that just to vent your own anger and frustration.

“Unless we as a people really punish those that do wrong, we will be punished as a nation. God have mercy on America.”

Juror 188 could have been seated on the panel had Williams’ attorney, Edi M.O. Faal, been successful in having Juror 104 removed. In transcripts that were released of earlier closed court sessions, some jurors accused Juror 104 of saying she would settle for a hung jury if that would allow her to go home to her boyfriend. Faal wanted her removed for misconduct.

Jo-Ellan Dimitrius, a jury specialist working for the defense, said she was concerned when Faal talked of removing Juror 104 because that could have changed the outcome of deliberations.

“So many things in her questionnaire indicated that she was a prosecution juror,” Dimitrius said of Juror 188, adding that the alternate was “very unhappy” with the verdicts in the federal trial of officers accused of violating Rodney G. King’s civil rights.

Prosecutors opposed the removal of Juror 104. But Deputy Dist. Atty. Janet Moore, one of two prosecutors, said she is uncertain whether placing Juror 188 on the panel would have produced a different outcome.

“Who knows how Juror 188 would have acted once she was back there with the other (jurors),” Moore said. “We could have had deadlocks on everything. You never know. Obviously we agree with (Juror) 188’s perspective, and we’re gratified that at least someone saw the evidence the same way we saw it.”

Prosecutors and defense attorneys were allowed to meet with all members of the jury briefly Monday but did not question them about how they arrived at their verdicts.

Later, Faal said Juror 104 was “obviously a little bit displeased” with him when they met Monday. “I hope we have mended fences,” he said.

In comments Monday afternoon, Moore appeared to take exception to the forewoman’s remarks that no outside considerations influenced the verdicts.

Moore said she did not believe it would have been possible for any juror to go into deliberations “and act like a robot or automaton and completely block out everything that has gone on about this case prior to the time when they were sequestered.”

She said she believed jurors did consider “why the riot occurred, the frustration the community was feeling.”

The defendants, Williams, 20, and Watson, 29, were charged with premeditated attempted murder--an offense carrying a possible life sentence--in the attack on Denny. They were both found not guilty. For his role in the Denny beating, Watson was convicted of misdemeanor assault, a crime carrying a maximum penalty of six months in jail. He had served 17 months in jail and was released on his own recognizance Wednesday.

Williams was also charged with aggravated mayhem, the crime of intentionally disfiguring or disabling someone. He was convicted on the lesser charge of simple mayhem, which carries a maximum penalty of eight years in prison rather than the life sentence possible for aggravated mayhem.

He faces up to eight years in prison on that conviction, and two more years on four misdemeanor assault convictions stemming from attacks on other victims. His sentencing has been scheduled for Dec. 7.

Faal has requested that Williams’ $580,000 bail be reduced to $35,000. A Monday hearing scheduled on that matter was postponed until next Tuesday.

Prosecutors said Monday that they were considering refiling assault with a deadly weapon charges against Watson for allegedly beating trucker Larry Tarvin, and their decision may be announced next Tuesday. Jurors deadlocked 9 to 3 for acquittal on that count, and Ouderkirk declared a mistrial on that charge.

Times staff writer Ashley Dunn contributed to this story.

From the Jurors (Southland Edition, A18)

From the jury forewoman, who issued a statement on behalf of the 12 jurors.

“There has been a lot expressed anger, shock, disbelief and speculation regarding the verdicts. The verdicts were decided according to the law, not through intimidation, fear of another riot, nor were the verdicts based on black versus white. The verdicts were based on the evidence and facts presented in court. We followed the judge’s instructions and all 12 of us understood the law as presented to us. We feel the verdicts rendered were within the confines of the law, not due to any outside influences or considerations. We do not condone what happened at Florence and Normandie. However, we the jury feel confident that we did the best job possible given the evidence and the applicable law. Thank you.”

From Juror 188, an alternate who did not take part in the deliberations:

“It is a sad day in America and for the human race when we are ruled by fear of retaliation from a small group of people, not by what is right and wrong in God’s eyes. It seems we as a society have deteriorated to a preschool mentality that it is all right for everyone to do what is right and wrong in her or his own eyes. The message the jury sent out basically is that if you don’t believe or agree with a verdict it is OK to go out in the streets, to choose certain fellow human beings, throw rocks at their cars, beat them up and take their property. All that just to vent your own anger and frustration. Unless we as a people really punish those that do wrong, we will be punished as a nation. God have mercy on America.”