Advertisement

Wind Testifies Koon Urged Him to Strike King

Share
ASSOCIATED PRESS

While a convicted policeman sought to avoid the witness stand, one of those acquitted in Rodney G. King’s beating testified that after King had been struck in the face, a sergeant shouted: “Hit him! Hit him!”

Timothy E. Wind, who was a rookie with the Los Angeles Police Department on the night of King’s notorious beating, acknowledged in a calm voice that he struck King with his baton nine or 10 times and kicked him six times. He said he was trying to keep King on the ground and believed the force used on King was not excessive.

“I wanted to get this man down so I could get him into custody,” said Wind, a defendant in King’s civil lawsuit.

Advertisement

It was the first time in three trials that Wind has told his version of events under oath. He was called as a hostile witness by one of King’s lawyers, John Burris, who had the officer demonstrate for jurors the kicking and baton techniques he used and had him analyze the beating videotape.

Wind said he saw one of the baton blows by his partner, Officer Laurence M. Powell, strike King in the face. It was after that, he said, that he moved in and began using his baton and foot on King.

“You did kick him, did you not?” asked Burris.

“I used my foot to try to push him back on the ground,” said Wind. Asked if anyone told him to strike King, Wind said, “I recalled looking at Sgt. (Stacey C.) Koon. I glanced up at him and he said, “Hit him! Hit him!”

“Was that before or after Mr. Powell had struck him in the face?” asked Burris.

“I believe it was after,” Wind said.

It was the first time anyone has attributed such an order to Koon, who was not in court during the testimony.

Wind acknowledged that although he was a rookie with the LAPD, he had seven years of police experience in Kansas. But he added, “I don’t think any experience really prepares you for what you see in Los Angeles.”

Earlier, Powell’s lawyers moved to invoke his 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination in King’s civil damage trial. They said anything he says could be used against him if federal appeals courts grant him a new criminal trial.

Advertisement

Powell and Koon, convicted last year of violating King’s civil rights, are serving 30-month prison sentences. Powell’s lawyers argued that he cannot be compelled to testify until all appeals of his civil rights conviction are resolved.

U.S. District Judge John Davies said some areas of questioning may be off limits, but agreed to rule on each area of inquiry after Powell takes the stand and invokes the privilege, probably Friday.

Meanwhile, opening statements began with a King lawyer blasting the Police Department for racist and brutal tactics and promising to show through expert witnesses and the Christopher Commission report that King’s beating represented standard operating procedure for violence prone officers.

Attorney Federico Sayre, addressing the same jury that awarded King $3.8 million in compensatory damages, said the only difference between King’s beating and the LAPD’s normal practice of brutality was that “someone was there filming it.”

Davies told jurors they will now face the task of deciding who pays and how much they pay in punishment for the March 3, 1991, beating that stunned the nation.

The city was the only defendant in the trial’s first phase.

Several of the 15 named defendants were seated in the courtroom front row as opening statements began. Former Police Chief Daryl F. Gates was absent.

Advertisement

The city, held liable in the first phase, is not a defendant, but its lawyer, Deputy City Atty. Don Vincent, is representing the bystander officers accused by King of failing to stop his beating.

The punitive damage phase began with no new efforts to settle the case out of court.

A lawyer for Powell said his client and other officers accused in the case are broke and cannot pay King any money.

King’s lawyer, Milton Grimes, disagreed. “I believe their net worth is going to be over $1 million,” he said. The city still needs to determine whether it will financially back the current or former city employees.

Advertisement