Two File Claims Against Riverside County

Lawyers for two Mexican citizens involved in an explosive confrontation with Riverside County sheriff’s deputies filed a $10-million claim against the county Thursday, alleging that deputies “recklessly, intentionally and wantonly” beat and kicked them, violating their civil and human rights.

According to the claim, filed by civil rights lawyer Peter A. Schey and his partner, Enrique Funes Flores was beaten with batons and Santiago Garcia Pedraza was thrown to the ground and kicked during the incident Monday. Flores is seeking $10 million; Pedraza is asking for $10,000.

A third person struck in the confrontation, Alicia Sotero Vasquez, also is expected to file a claim, the precursor to bringing a lawsuit. Her lawyer, David Lynn Ross, said her claim is unlikely to be filed until next week.

“Our investigation shows that the beating was completely unprovoked and the principal victims were not attempting to escape,” Schey said. “Ironically, they might have been better off if they had tried to escape with the other immigrants in the truck.”

Elsewhere, the fallout from Monday’s incident continued:

* Riverside County officials said they are investigating another thorny issue in the case, the question of whether the two deputies, Kurt Franklin and Tracy Watson, were ordered to call off the pursuit but disobeyed that order. Sheriff’s Department officials would not comment on that issue except to confirm that it is under review.

* Sources close to the joint federal-Los Angeles County investigation said authorities believe the key witness in the incident may be a California Highway Patrol officer who saw the beating unfold. That officer, whom sources identified as Marco DeGennaro, is expected to be questioned by FBI agents and Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies.

* The State Bar of California confirmed that it is investigating reports of possible “ambulance chasing” by lawyers and others who allegedly rushed to the federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles, where the truck’s passengers were taken after the videotaped incident. An official with the bar also said that Sotero’s lawyer, Ross, is not licensed to practice in California and only was eligible to handle certain administrative matters.

* More than 400 protesters held an evening march in downtown Los Angeles, where they were joined by Cardinal Roger M. Mahony.

As the march departed for the federal building, Mahony mingled with the marchers and said he shared their shock at the scene portrayed in the videotape. “I just felt a great deal of powerlessness,” he said. “We just need to find better ways to deal with these things as a people.”

One of the protesters, Cecilia Tobar of Inglewood, said she “came to protest against the brutality. They [the passengers in the truck] didn’t do anything wrong. They were trying to find a better future for their families.”

Some demonstrators carried American flags, but no Mexican flags were visible. Earlier in the day, Mexican Consul General Jose Angel Pescador asked that protesters refrain from flying the Mexican flag. “That way,” he said, “we can avoid stereotypes.”

Even as protesters massed in Los Angeles, FBI agents and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department deputies were pressing ahead with their investigation. Sources said the team, in place for just two days, already has identified a number of possible witnesses. Potentially the most important, sources said, is DeGennaro, who has worked for the highway patrol since 1994.

DeGennaro is assigned to the agency’s Santa Fe Springs station, according to the CHP. He was not available for comment Thursday.

John D. Barnett, the lawyer who represents Franklin, declined to comment on DeGennaro’s possible role in the case and on the issue of whether his client was ordered to call off the chase except to say that questions about that aspect of the chase have not been raised with him. Barnett did express frustration, however, with the decision to free the passengers of the truck, all of whom were suspected of being in the country illegally.

“The people in the truck are involved in a conspiracy to commit a crime, which makes them liable for the acts of the driver,” said Barnett, adding that passengers in the back of the truck also were throwing objects at the police to deter them from making arrests.

“It’s unprecedented that those folks would be simply released when there clearly is some criminal exposure,” Barnett said. Instead, he added, “the investigation focuses on the arresting officers.”

In Riverside, meanwhile, a top county official said the Riverside County Board of Supervisors is eager to review police radio calls to determine whether the deputies were asked to break off the pursuit.

“That has been raised as a point,” said Bob Buster, the board’s vice chairman. “We need to find out whether that was indeed the case, and need to review the radio transcripts. A series of investigations are underway, and I’m sure the board will be afforded a copy of them.”

Sgt. Mark Lohman, a spokesman for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department, said the matter was under investigation but declined to comment in detail. He added that the dispatch tapes appeared to be “inconclusive” but were still being reviewed.

Lohman added that it is possible that an order was given to end the chase, but the deputies lost the radio signal as they crossed into Los Angeles County, where the chase ended.

At issue, sources said, is whether Franklin and Watson heard and countermanded an order from a supervisor demanding that they break off the pursuit. If so, that would almost certainly compound the troubles already mounting against the two deputies, who have been suspended from active duty while their actions are being reviewed by their own department and by observers worldwide.

Among police officers and former officers schooled in the use of force, Monday’s incident has provided fodder for lively discussions. In interviews Thursday, police experts across the country cautioned against quick judgments about whether Watson and Franklin violated sheriff’s policies or the law.

Still, the general consensus among those experts--including some who have defended other controversial uses of police force--was that the videotape suggests that the two deputies used more force than was necessary to handle the situation.

“From what’s on that tape, there’s no justification for the force that was used,” said Deputy Chief Bernard Parks, who heads the LAPD’s Bureau of Special Investigations, a unit that includes its Internal Affairs Division.

“If you give the deputies all the benefit of the doubt . . . they would have every right to have the baton out,” Parks said. “But when people are hanging on the side of a truck quivering and doing nothing that is harmful, there is no reason to strike them.”

Ed Nowicki, former executive director of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainees, cautioned against quick judgments but said he was taken aback by what he saw on the videotape.

“My initial impression is that it doesn’t look good,” said Nowicki, who testified in the Rodney G. King civil rights trial that the officers in that case acted appropriately. “You have to temper that reaction, though. What I learned in the Rodney King case is that you better know all the facts.”

Likewise, LAPD Sgt. Charlie Duke, a veteran SWAT officer who testified for the defense in the King trials, said that too many facts were not yet known for experts to reach conclusions about whether the deputies used too much force.

Others have been quicker to react. Riverside County Sheriff Larry Smith on Wednesday denounced his deputies’ actions, and other experts agreed.

“I think the tape speaks for itself,” said James Fyfe.