King Bystanders Are Not Indicted : Police: Reiner says the officers violated no criminal statutes. But he will send the case to the U.S. attorney, who could charge them under federal civil rights laws.

Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner announced Friday that the grand jury investigating the Rodney G. King beating has decided not to indict any of the 17 Los Angeles police officers who were at the scene but did not take part in the attack.

“However morally wrong their failure to intercede, in California law there is no criminal statute under which these officers can be indicted,” Reiner said. He added, “No matter how reprehensible their action, or their inaction, no person can be charged with a crime unless they have violated a statute.”

During a press conference at which he refused to take questions, the district attorney said he referred the case to the U.S. attorney’s office for investigation of possible violations of federal civil rights law.

And because the officers’ attitudes are “of great concern to professional law enforcement,” Reiner said he will give interviews his office conducted with them to the Christopher Commission, the panel investigating the Los Angeles Police Department and the use of excessive force.

“While many of the bystander officers were deeply disturbed by what occurred,” Reiner said, “I need to note that in the course of our investigation we found that, to this very day, some of the officers present do not acknowledge that the incident should have been handled any differently than it was.”

During a five-day investigation spread over the past month, the Los Angeles County Grand Jury heard testimony from seven officers, including five rookies who witnessed the arrest of King in Lake View Terrace and two who were not at the scene. The remaining 12 officers were never questioned by the 23-member panel.

The Foothill Division rookies testified that they responded to a police pursuit call that began with a high-speed chase just after midnight March 3 and ended minutes later with King on the ground, bleeding from a severe beating. They told the grand jury that the scene was chaotic and noisy, that King appeared dangerous and possibly high on PCP, and that the sergeant there seemed to be in charge.

None were asked they did not try to stop the relentless beating that continued after the unarmed motorist was already subdued and on the ground. Later tests showed he was legally intoxicated but not on PCP.

Four officers whose roles in the beating were captured on videotape by an amateur photographer trying out his new camera were indicted on assault and excessive-force charges within two weeks of the incident. A total of 27 law enforcement officers were at the scene that night, including 21 Los Angeles Police Department officers.

Community outrage was also directed at those who stood by passively, and civil rights groups demanded that they be prosecuted for their inaction.

Friday’s official announcement surprised few, but was met with anger and disappointment among those who have been demanding the ouster of Police Chief Daryl F. Gates.

“I think it sends a bad message,” said Ramona Ripston, director of the Southern California chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. “I think it sends a wrong message to law enforcement personnel throughout Los Angeles, that there is no obligation to turn in law enforcement officers who abuse people. If citizens stand by and see a crime being committed, they are expected to report it. How can we expect less of our police officers?”

Joseph Duff, president of the Los Angeles branch of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People, said he did not feel the grand jury probe was thorough, noting that Reiner did not elicit testimony from all the officers present at the beating.

“I’m not convinced the district attorney has done everything that could be done or should be done in the situation,” Duff said. “I would hope that the U.S. attorney will take these and run with them harder.”

The Brotherhood Crusade’s Danny Bakewell said the grand jury’s decision not to prosecute is painful to the black community.

“If we had tried to stop those officers from beating King, we as citizens would be charged with obstructing justice,” Bakewell said. “Yet they are not under any mandate when they stand by and watch an African-American being brutalized.

“That they are pursuing federal charges does not lessen our sense of hurt and our sense of pain.”

But Geoffrey Taylor Gibbs, who on behalf of 900 black lawyers met earlier this week with Reiner urging him to file charges against the bystanders, said Friday: “We are confident that the district attorney shares our concerns and that they can be brought forward in the federal courts.”

Reiner’s announcement drew a quick response from City Hall as well.

Mayor Tom Bradley called for a state law making it a crime for police officers to stand by and do nothing when they witness their colleagues using excessive force.

“I’m not going to try to second-guess the district attorney or the grand jury in their decision . . . (but) it does point out a serious problem in our state,” Bradley said. “Officers who are at a scene where they observe heinous crimes such as the Rodney King beating ought to be required to take some action to intervene and say, ‘Hold it. Stop.’ ”

Gates had no comment. Cmdr. Rick Dinse, who heads the department’s criminal and internal affairs investigations of the King incident, spoke for the chief.

“We believe that the D.A. has come to the proper conclusion as to the criminal liability of the officers involved,” Dinse said.

“We’re glad that (grand jury) aspect is over, and we’re going to continue with our administrative investigation into the incident and provide the officers with the due process rights under our disciplinary system.”

Dinse said the department’s investigation of the bystanders is nearly complete, and its findings will be reviewed by the Valley Bureau before Gates decides on what discipline, if any, is warranted. Dinse said the process will take at least three more weeks.

Diane Marchant, an attorney hired by the Police Protective League to represent the 17 bystanders, said she was relieved but not surprised by Reiner’s announcement.

“I never could satisfy myself that there was any law that applied to these other officers at the scene,” Marchant said. “So I’m not surprised, but I’m certainly relieved for them.”

Reiner explained to a crush of reporters and cameras that his office could find no statutes applicable to the conduct of the bystanders, conduct he termed “irresponsible and offensive.”

Reiner said his office had combed the Penal Code and looked at statutes suggested by others, yet could still not justify seeking an indictment.

They cannot be charged with aiding and abetting their fellow officers in the assault, he said. Quoting California law, he said “mere presence at the scene of a crime . . . does not amount to aiding and abetting. Mere knowledge that a crime is being committed and the failure to prevent it does not amount to aiding and abetting.”

Nor can they be charged with dereliction of duty for their failure to stop a crime in progress, he said, because that is not against state law. “Although such conduct is disgraceful, and perhaps cause for dismissal, it is not a criminal offense.”

Reiner said the only exception that is “remotely applicable” to the King case is the requirement that a police officer suppress an unlawful or riotous assembly. But he said that trying to fit the facts of the King case into a law that deals with “meetings, demonstrations and rampaging mobs” would be a “distorted interpretation” of state law.

After reading a 2 1/2-page statement, Reiner left the news conference without taking questions. Deputy Dist. Attys. Terry White and Alan Yochelson, who are prosecuting the King case, were not present.

The prosecutors return to court Monday for final pretrial motions in the case against the four indicted officers--Sgt. Stacey C. Koon and Officers Laurence M. Powell, Timothy E. Wind and Theodore J. Briseno.

Reiner said allegations of racial motivation in the King beating do not involve the bystander officers. He was referring to a racist remark involving the film “Gorillas in the Mist” made before the King arrest and transmitted via a computer in Powell and Wind’s patrol car, as well as the possible use of a racial slur during the beating itself.

If the four indicted officers are convicted, he said, “Their racial motivation can--and will--be urged as an enhancement factor at the time of sentencing.”

Earlier this week, Wind was fired from the force for his role in the beating, and the other three were ordered to face administrative hearings that could lead to their dismissals.

Briseno’s hearing is set for May 20, while Koon will go before a separate three-member board May 23.

Wind, who is a rookie, asked a Superior Court judge Friday to block his firing and afford him a full Board of Rights hearing. No decision was made.

Superior Court Judge William Huss took under submission the request for a temporary restraining order that would put Wind back on the force and suspend him without pay, pending a full hearing.

Only officers with more than 18 months’ service are given full hearings; Wind has been on the force one year.

Patrick Thistle, attorney for the Police Protective League, argued that employees who face firings to which “great stigma” is attached must have a full hearing, not the abbreviated hearing before one officer that normally is afforded probationary police officers.

He argued that a recent appeals court decision held that rookies are entitled to full hearings, but Deputy City Atty. David Hotchkiss said the Wind case is different because Wind has already made what he termed “admissions of misconduct.”