$611,000 Awarded to 3 Men in Brutality Case : Law enforcement: Damages are the first assessed in a vast lawsuit against the Sheriff’s Department and deputies in Lynwood.

One of the nation’s largest police misconduct cases reached a milestone Wednesday when a federal jury awarded $611,000 to three African American men who are the first of scores of plaintiffs to allege a long pattern of brutality and racism by Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies in Lynwood.

The damages, which may be appealed by the county, were awarded by the same jury that recently held Sheriff Sherman Block and two of his top assistants liable for civil rights violations by their deputies.

That July 14 ruling was believed to mark the first time a jury has held the department’s top command responsible for use of excessive force by deputies. And that decision could pave the way for other awards in a lawsuit that has already spanned five years and cost the county $4.9 million in attorney fees alone.

Outside the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr., several jurors said the Sheriff’s Department has not adequately tracked misconduct or disciplined some deputies--dozens of whom have been named in the litigation.

“We felt there was a blatant disregard for protecting the public from rogue officers,” said Klaus Silbermann, a 39-year-old real estate agent from Santa Barbara. “I know the job of law enforcement is very difficult . . . but that still doesn’t excuse headhunting, rogue cops just going after people.”

“As taxpaying citizens, we are not going to take being harassed by people who are supposed to be there to protect and serve,” said jury forewoman Alicia Adkins 25, who lives in San Pedro and is a collections representative for the Internal Revenue Service.

Although larger monetary awards have been issued against the 8,000-deputy department and other law enforcement agencies, the jury’s ruling is significant because it ends the first of as many as 24 cases pending in Hatter’s court against Lynwood deputies.

Deliberating three days, the jury ordered the county to pay $452,000 in damages to Darren Thomas, 34, of South-Central Los Angeles. Thomas, who works for the county’s Public Works Department, was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Jurors awarded $85,000 to Michael Sterling, 29, of Lynwood and $28,000 to Kevin Marshall, 31, of Oakland. The men were arrested April 28, 1990, after returning from the funeral of a friend and fighting with sheriff’s deputies who had ordered them to quit drinking beer in the front yard of a Lynwood residence.

“I can’t even think right now,” a stunned Thomas said after the award was announced. “It definitely was a big victory as far as civil rights are concerned.”

Although virtually all of the award is to be paid by the county, the jury ruled that damages also be paid by two of six deputies originally accused in the case. Deputy Ruben Gracia, 40, was ordered to pay $1 to Sterling after jurors expressed doubts about their earlier conclusion that Gracia was the deputy who shoved a shotgun in Sterling’s face.

But there was no second-guessing by the jury in the case of former Deputy Guy Mato, 38, who was ordered to pay $40,826 to Thomas for almost rendering him unconscious with a chokehold and allegedly leading a beating that knocked out Thomas’ front teeth. Mato retired from the department last year.

*

Mato did not appear in court and could not be reached for comment. Gracia said he was pleased that the jury’s nominal damage award showed that it was no longer convinced he was guilty of misconduct. But he expressed disappointment that earlier finding was not overturned. “It’s real mixed,” he said. “I’m just glad it’s over.”

After the damages were announced, Deputy County Counsel Patrick Meyers had little comment. “I’m disappointed in the amount. I think it’s excessive,” said Meyers, who added only that he would recommend that the county appeal the damages and earlier rulings in the case.

The Sheriff’s Department, which had vigorously disputed the brutality allegations, said it had no immediate comment on the findings of the jury because it had yet to consult with county attorneys.

Also refusing comment was Carol Humiston, whose firm Morris, Polich & Purdy has received the lion’s share of $3 million paid for private counsel in the case.

The class-action litigation began in 1990 when residents, most of them black and Latino, accused deputies of “systematic acts of shooting, killing, brutality, terrorism, house-trashing and other acts of lawlessness and wanton abuse of power.”

The suit initially involved 108 deputies and about 70 residents, although the number of deputies being sued has dropped to about 70 and the plaintiffs now number about 50. Their allegations, which will be aired in the months or even years ahead, include accounts of false arrest, assaults with electronic stun guns and unlawful shootings. The plaintiffs are represented by a team of 15 lawyers.

In addition to the financial consequences for the county, attorneys for the plaintiffs said the lawsuit will affect the Sheriff’s Department’s reputation because the jury ruled that “deliberate indifference” by Block, Undersheriff Jerry Harper and former Undersheriff Robert Edmonds contributed to the excessive force used by deputies.

“I think it shows that the LAPD is not the only gang in town,” plaintiffs’ attorney Donald W. Cook said of the jury’s finding. “People have always associated misconduct with the LAPD. After this, maybe they will think of the Sheriff’s Department and, in particular, Sherman Block.”

Not long after the mammoth case landed in federal court, Judge Hatter took the extraordinary step of ordering the Sheriff’s Department to strictly adhere to its use-of-force guidelines and to send him every brutality complaint lodged against deputies.

Later, in October, 1991, Hatter found that deputies at the Lynwood station routinely violated civil rights, were motivated by “racial hostility” and relied on “terrorist-type tactics” with the knowledge of their bosses. In his findings, Hatter described one group of deputies, who called themselves the “Vikings,” as a “neo-Nazi, white supremacist gang”--a description bitterly denied by the deputies and Block.

*

In the first of the class-action cases to come to trial, Thomas, Sterling and Marshall alleged that their rights were violated in 1990 after their arrest by Lynwood deputies.

During a month of testimony, attorneys for the men first persuaded a jury that excessive force had been used, though only two of six deputies accused of misconduct were held responsible. Later, the same jury found the department’s top brass accountable for the actions of deputies. Finally, last Friday, the jury began deliberating damages.

In concluding their defense, attorneys for the county insisted that any damages should be awarded just to Thomas because he was the only plaintiff to offer any evidence of injuries.

Even then, the county’s Meyers said, the award should be minimal and cover only Thomas’ medical bills because he failed to prove he had suffered psychologically. “If Mr. Thomas was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, why didn’t he seek or receive any treatment whatsoever?” Meyers asked the jury.

But the plaintiffs’ attorneys reminded jurors that they already had judged two deputies guilty of misconduct and insisted that they--and the Sheriff’s Department--had to be sent a message.

“We’re not trying to render them homeless,” plaintiffs’ attorney Carol Watson said of the deputies, “but the amount you award should be enough to hurt. Not to ruin them, but to hurt.”

*

That was especially true, she later said, because the deputies had been exonerated for actions that warranted discipline. “If they were civilians, they’d be in jail,” Watson argued. “But the D.A. didn’t prosecute them and neither can we.”

In testimony leading to the award, attorneys for Thomas, Sterling and Marshall sought to convince the jury that the physical and verbal assaults against their clients had been not only brutal but also indelible. During questioning by plaintiffs’ co-counsel Jorge Gonzalez, for example, Sterling testified that he feared he and Thomas might be killed by Lynwood deputies after being arrested and taken to a Sheriff’s Department trailer used to interrogate and book gang members.

There, Sterling said, he saw Thomas on the floor of one room before its door was closed. Then, he said, he heard the muffled sounds of “a ruckus.” It was during that altercation that Mato was alleged to have violated Thomas’ civil rights in an assault.

Contending that he was worried that deputies might beat his cousin to death, Sterling testified, “I started panicking. I started yelling, ‘You better not kill him. . . .’ I was so nervous. I was just asking God not to let them kill him.”