Police Brutality Re-framed Through Video

October 30, 2007.

The Rodney King trial demonstrated how the graphic representation of King’s beating by police could be manipulated through a barrage of tactics (including coding, highlighting and the breaking down/ overly complicating the graphic representation) to result in drastically different perceptions (Goodwin 607). These perceptions created a criminal and dehumanized image of King and resulted in the innocent verdict for the police involved.

After watching The Rodney King Case: What the Jury Saw in California v. Powell, I was perplexed with the idea that someone could be treated so brutally and then have their perpetrators’ actions sanctioned. In King’s case, the action taken by police seemed blatantly motivated by racism, as in many portions of the trial, King is referred to as being bear-like and similar to that of the gorillas in Gorilla’s in the Midst. He is also accused of being high on PCP and thus exerting super-strength. One of the police officers actually celebrates his actions that night by saying, “I haven’t beaten anyone like this for a long time” over his police radio. King’s lawyer Terry White used these indications of racism dismally; instead he relied completely on what the jury saw on the videotape.

The defendants, however, used the footage frame by frame to show that King was in complete control of the situation and the police present were following normal protocol for the situation; Charles Goodwin explains these tactics in his article, “Professional Vision”. Through coding schemes the defense was able to prove that the actions taken were based on King’s body movements and a system of escalation and de-escalation (Goodwin 616). This was especially successful in showing that the police were just following what they had been taught. In order to back this up, an “expert” was brought in to support the actions and perceptions the police had during the event. The use of an expert who was not present at the event, but who could support the actions of the police proved very valuable to the case.

The grouping of the police based on profession worries me however. Especially in the United States there is a high sense of respect for the men in blue by white America, especially after 9/11. Although the King beating occurred before 9/11, these ideologies probably still resonated with white America, which was probably why the trial was held in a Los Angeles suburb instead of in the inner-city where police brutality and corruption are more frequent. The anger and riots that ensued once the tapes were shown by the media demonstrated the already present distrust those who were lower class or not white had. It seems really problematic that the police were built as being a collective entity who acted in a responsible way while King was individualized and turned into an animal amongst over 14 police officers who could have easily restrained King in a much more humane matter.

Other tactics used by the police that Goodwin discusses are highlighting and reframing of the video. Similarly to the Kuleshov Effect (as discussed in class) the defense was able to give context to paused video/pictures that as a whole was not previously present. Instead of portraying King’s actions of having a “cocked” leg as being a reaction to being beaten and tasered, they were able to portray King as someone they had to fear and keep control over, thus ending the de-escalation period.

Overall this video showed that through convincing evidence that previously didn’t exist, and dismal representation from the prosecution, a black man could be beaten and dehumanized without the police being punished for it. Although in a re-trial, two of the police were found guilty, the fact that a result like this could happen brings into question how many other times have the police and those who are idealized by our culture gotten away with criminal acts of these and lesser proportions.