“Rodney King didn’t die; there were no murder charges...”
I know. I said the cops were accused of Attempted Murder in the first trial. They were over-charged by the DA. In order to find guilt, they had to prove that the cops were going out that night to end King’s life...wasn’t going to happen.
“The cops were accused for the beating, and cleared by a jury (who saw the WHOLE tape - it was evidence)....”
I referenced the tape’s use but was referring to the way the media played the [incriminating] excerpts from the tape. I watched that trial on TV and remember watching the defense attorney playing the part seldom seen in the media—the part where King was tazed by the cops...then got up and rushed toward them. That’s when they started the serious beat-down that came to be known as “the Rodney King tape”. This part, which set most of the actions of the police in motion, was seldom seen by people unless they happened to tune in to the trial.
Did they become excessive in their beating of King? Probably (though, I’m no expert—just trying to remember my own reactions when I saw/heard everything from the trial.) Should they have had to go to jail? Heck no! King was high on PCP, showing no signs that tazing him was having any effect, displaying aggressive behavior, and showed an unwillingness to cooperate. Suspension/fine? Sure, I can see that. Criminal behavior? Sorry, the police did their job on someone who was acting criminally that night.
That selective showing of the Rodney King tape has to be the worst journalistic malpractice I can think of that I recall, and the people’s deaths in the riot that followed can be laid at the feet of the “media”.