Rodney King Case Essay Example

fact that Rodney King is an African-American.

During the beating, one of the officers uttered words attributable to being a racist. The reports also contributed to the application of willful, intentional, and unreasonable force in making the arrest. As such, the police officers are negligent in carrying out their duties as peace officers. 3. In defense of the respondent or the police officers, the use of excessive use was in the lawful exercise of their duty as law enforcers. According to the police officers, Rodney king was in control of the situation (518 U.

S. 81). In addition, they testified that King was intimidating officer Singer by saying bad words and by acting as if he is ready to threaten her. Significantly, Rodney King’s wrongful acts contributed in provoking the police officers (518 U. S. 81). Moreover, the police officers felt danger on the basis of King’s acts. This is considered as mitigating the liabilities of the police officers. Aside from violating the traffic rules, King also committed an aggravated assault against the police officers.

The truth that Koon believe that King was an ex-con and under the influence of drug, they merely ensured that King would not be able to retaliate or defense himself and hurt them. As such, there was fear among the police officers that they might be killed by King. Furthermore, the police officers use of force was provoked and lawful and is in line with a legal arrest as King was committing a crime at that very moment. Hence, the police officers’ use of excessive force was to defend them from violent act of King and to ensure arrest. 4.

With regard to the

plaintiff’s argument as to liability of the police officers, the physical injuries he suffered and the violation of his right under the Constitution are good enough to establish liability. First, the physical injury that King suffered has caused him financial loss as he was hospitalized. The beating has caused him to stop temporarily from his personal activities and impeded him from working because he needed to be treated. Second, his rights not to be subjected to excessive punishment or force while being arrested is evident from the videotape alone.

In establishing violation of the Constitutional right against excessive force, King has established the fact that he was legally arrested and seized. However, the force used against him was unreasonable. Notably, King suffered more than fifty baton blows and physically hit causing his head to hit hard against the (Linder). Moreover, this is aggravated by the fact that the Sergeant Koon allowed the beating despite the cry of King to stop them. King’s misconduct or provocation is not enough to justify the unreasonableness of the police officers in making the arrest.

Thus, civil liability should be awarded against the police department for violating the right of King and for the physical injuries he had suffered as a result of the arrest. 5. As to civil liability, the police department should not pay or suffer. The main reason is because the police officers were in the lawful exercise of their duty as peace officers. The liability should not extend to them because, first of all, Rodney King assaulted the police officers. Instead of willfully subjecting himself to the police officers, he made intimidating statements and acted as if he

was ready to inflict the officers.

In addition, the provocative acts of Rodney aggravated the police officer’s conduct to injure him and to ensure that Rodney would not retaliate. The physical injuries he suffered was caused by his provocation and assault. Significantly, the claim for violation of right due to excessive force cannot stand because the acts of the police officers were in line with their legal duty to pacify the situation and arrest Rodney who was committing a crime. Thus, the police department should not be liable because it was Rodney himself who caused the circumstances to happen.