King Detained Again--but No Crime Occurred

For the second time in a week, Rodney G. King was detained by police Friday night--but this time officers in Glendale said they realized that no crime had been committed and did not arrest him.

On July 14, King was arrested on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon and domestic violence after his car allegedly knocked a woman to the ground as he drove away from a home in Alhambra.

Released on $50,000 bail the next morning, King--whose videotaped beating by police made worldwide headlines and led to the 1992 riots--was ordered to appear in court Aug. 16.

This time, the Glendale Police Department said, it was all a matter of a confused witness.

Department spokesman Chahe Keuroghelian said the witness was walking along Brand Boulevard about 5 p.m. when he heard a commotion and saw a black man with a purse walk rapidly by, get into a car and drive off.

Suspecting the worst, the witness flagged down a nearby police officer, reported a purse-snatching and pointed to the car, Keuroghelian said. The officer gave chase and pulled the car to the curb.

“The male driver was asked to get out,” Keuroghelian said. “He complied. There was a pat-down search. Nothing illegal was found. The officer asked for an ID. The driver provided one. The officer realized it was Rodney King.”

Keuroghelian said that with King’s permission the car was searched “and the officers found a purse--a man’s purse with property in it that belonged to King.”

“He was released,” Keuroghelian said. “There was no evidence of any type of crime.”

For the 30-year-old King, it was another in a series of encounters with law enforcement that include a Hollywood vice arrest in 1991 in which no charges were filed, a spousal abuse arrest in 1992 in which his wife declined to press charges, and a drunk-driving arrest in Pennsylvania in May after he refused to take a blood-alcohol test.

And his troubles don’t end there.

King--whose beating by police won him a $3.8-million judgment against the city of Los Angeles--is now locked in a fee dispute with his onetime lead lawyer that could cost him much of the award.

Attorney Milton C. Grimes filed a lawsuit Thursday in Orange County Superior Court alleging that King not only owes him and other attorneys and experts in the case nearly $1 million, but also should be forced to pay an additional $1.4 million for allegedly slandering his onetime legal representative and confidant.

The Newport Beach-based lawyer said he merely wants King to honor an agreement to pay a quarter of any judgment in the case, or $954,000, in addition to the $456,000 in fees that U.S. District Court Judge John G. Davies ordered the city of Los Angeles to pay directly to Grimes.

“We had an agreement,” said Grimes in an interview. “I worked with him on a daily basis preparing him for the case and just keeping him alive and advising him. We had him working with a tutor to get his GED [high school equivalency degree]. He came to my home and my office at all hours, and we had people work with him to instill some self-worth in him, some dignity.

“I spent $300,000 of my own money on this case for doctors and experts. . . . I have no qualms at all about this,” Grimes said.

King could not be reached for comment. But he is represented in the fee dispute by Steven Lerman, his original attorney in the civil rights lawsuit. Lerman has been engaged in a protracted and bitter dispute with Grimes over who should represent the former construction worker from Altadena.

“Rodney King is only obligated to pay those fees that any other client would have to pay,” Lerman said. “Just because he is Rodney King doesn’t mean he should be beaten up for fees. He has already been beaten up once and doesn’t want to be beaten up again.”

Along with his lawsuit, Grimes filed a copy of his contract with King, which calls for the 25% contingency fee. The attorney said he had an oral agreement with his client that the contingency fee would be in addition to any attorney fees that the city was ordered to pay after losing the case.

Lerman disagrees, saying King never agreed to pay both a percentage of his award and the money awarded by Davies. “All the lawyers in this case, with the exception of Mr. Grimes, have agreed to take the attorney fee awarded by the court and live with that,” Lerman said. “Only Grimes wants more.”

In federal civil rights cases, plaintiffs are entitled to have their attorneys’ fees paid by the defendant if they prevail at trial.

More than a dozen lawyers for King submitted bills totaling $4.4 million, but Davies drastically reduced those fees to $1.6 million, saying many of the other billings were for a failed punitive damage claim and for media appearances. (Even some of those payments, including $456,000 to Grimes, have allegedly been frozen because of the disagreement.)

Grimes’ defamation claim against his former client stems from King’s appearance in May on a local television news program, in which he purportedly said his attorney kept all but $500,000 of his judgment. The statement implied that Grimes “had in some fashion absconded, stolen and/or duped him out of the portion of the judgment to which he was entitled,” the attorney contends in his suit.