Let’s Get to the Point : Another drawn-out King trial? Not if the city can help it

Los Angeles--rocked not only by geologic upheavals but also, just 20 months ago, by quakes in the civil order--will be in court soon to defend itself in the Rodney King case. This time the issue is the amount of damages to which King is entitled under the law.

At least that ought to be the issue--that and no other. If the judge hearing King’s suit against the city sides with the city’s helpful proposal to bypass what amounts to a top-to-bottom retrial of the case, Los Angeles will be much the better for it.

THE CITY’S PROPOSAL: There is no question that police officers beat King. No one quarrels with that--including the Los Angeles City Council, which voted unanimously to acknowledge liability for the excessive and illegal use of force by the LAPD members who arrested King after he was stopped for a traffic violation on March 3, 1991. In fact the council has asked that the trial stemming from King’s federal civil suit jump immediately to deciding the amount the plaintiff should be paid.

The growing hope is that the city’s wise proposal will hasten the end of this most unfortunate and incendiary affair. If U.S. District Judge John G. Davies, who is presiding over the trial, agrees with the city’s position, a third jury need not rehash the traumatic events of March 3, 1991.

King, an African American who was arrested for speeding and evading arrest after a wild chase on a freeway and through city streets, initially sought $57 million--$1 million for each time he claimed police struck him. That figure is absolutely absurd, of course, but he does deserve fair compensation for his injuries, emotional distress and lost wages.

But must the process take forever?

A proper out-of-court settlement would compensate King both fairly and expeditiously; unfortunately, negotiations have failed to close the gap between the $9.5 million most recently requested by the plaintiff’s lawyer and the $1.25 million offered by the city. Is a deal still impossible?

AN UNNECESSARY REPLAY: Absent an out-of-court settlement, a jury must decide how much the city should pay.

Does that jury need to examine everything that took place on that fateful night in Lake View Terrace? No, argue attorneys representing the city: Because the council accepts responsibility, a jury need not revisit the vicious beating captured in a videotape that wouldshock much of the world.

If the judge accepts the city’s motion, as we hope, he can direct the jury to go straight to the damages phase. Los Angeles already has endured two trials stemming directly from the King beating. Acquittals in the first trial, a state proceeding, touched off riots. Convictions in the second trial, a federal civil rights proceeding, produced cheers in many areas of Los Angeles and jeers in many others. These divisions need time to heal, and another painful look at what the police officers did to King won’t speed the process.

Trials resulting from the 1992 riots, such as the controversial cases of Damian M. Williams and others charged in the beating of trucker Reginald O. Denny, also have contributed to tensions that will not go away easily. Each new trial has forced Los Angeles to once again live through events that clearly and deeply traumatized its civic equanimity.

How many more times must Los Angeles suffer? A jury should decide how much King should get, promptly, and that should close the book on that awful night in 1991 and the awful days and nights it spawned.