The following four articles, even though reporting the same incident take different approaches to the reporting. The General Newspapers, from Atlanta and London both use the word Verdict in the Headline and are somewhat sensationalistic in their headings. In contrast the Armenian American Article sums up what alot of minorities might have been thinking, "How does this affect us?" In the excellent article from the Armenian Reporter, The author cites examples of institutionalized oppression against numerous racial groups. Another comparison is between the headlines from Atlanta and the Sentinel both support the Videotape as evidence and the verdict in opposition to that evidence.

Bibliography

Author Shifflett, Lynne C.
Article Title Trial Testimony Ends: the Tape Tells the Tale
Publication Name Los Angeles Sentinel (African American)
Volume Number V.LVIII;N.2
Publication Date 04-29-1992
Page p.A-1

Author Mooradian, Moorad
Article Title The Rodney King Decision and Armenians What has the Rodney King trial and its aftermath got to do with Armenians? Everything.
Publication Name Armenian Reporter, (The Armenian American)
Volume Number V.25; N.32
Publication Date 05-16-1992
Page p.3

Article TitleVERDICTS RETURNED IN L.A. BEATING Outraged leaders say verdicts clash with video images
Publication Name The Atlanta Journal and Constitution
Publication Date: April 30, 1992

Author CHRISTOPHER REED
Article Title LA STUNNED BY VERDICT ON POLICE
Publication Name The Guardian (London),
Publication Date April 30, 1992
Page: Pg. 20

Complete articles attached....
Armenian Reporter, The 05-16-1992 V.25; N.32 p.3
The Rodney King Decision and Armenians

Author
Mooradian, Moorad
Article
Opinions - The Rodney King Decision and Armenians.
What has the Rodney King trial and its aftermath got to do with Armenians?
Everything.
Armenian Americans do not live in a cocoon. When an injustice is done to any American an injustice is done to every American. Surely that shameful jury decision made a mockery of the spirit of the American system of justice. Most assuredly the minority of lawless people that wrought havoc, destruction and death greater than the 1967 Watts riots, is not to be condoned, encouraged nor excused, but no American should allow the second wrong to detract from the catalyst. Let no American, particularly not Armenian Americans, stereotype the majority of law-abiding people who live in the ravaged areas, because to do so places Armenians in harm's way as assuredly as Afro-Americans face every day of their lives. It was not so many years ago that Armenians faced blatant racism in the highest courts of this nation so Armenian Americans can't afford to grow complacent about injustices perpetrated on other peoples.
When the temptation to look the other way becomes convenient, recall that statutes in some American cities prohibited the sale of property to "Niggers, Orientals and Armenians." This type of written mendacity was not removed from the books of one state until the Shelly vs. Kramer case in 1948 when the Supreme Court declared such restrictions unconstitutional. Is there a guarantee that unwritten banishment for Armenians has been expunged from the inner circles of the "pure white" minds of all people in seats of power? Do you believe that bias against Armenians is gone when candidates for public office rail against immigrants and immigration? They are not talking about prohibition for immigration from Northern Europe. American immigration laws were not written to allow all people in; they were written to keep "undesirables" out and Armenians are still among the undesirables. It took an awful lot of work by Armenian friends in the U.S. Congress to allow Armenians from the USSR into this country because some folks in the State Department did not classify them as political refugees. This is nothing new.
In the late 1890's Immigration Commissioner Deahanty voiced strenuous objections to people being allowed into this country other than those from Western Europe. He vowed that Armenian refugees would be "sent back to Turkey, even if chances were they might fall into the hands of Turkish cruelty." He personally delayed a group of Armenians on Ellis Island pending confirmation that every one had jobs waiting. The commissioner encouraged the rumor that the Armenians intended to settle in Hokokus, New Jersey, thereby instigating Jerseyites to circulate a petition denouncing all Armenians as "paupers and aliens" that would harass "honest, hard-working taxpayers."
In 1909 the U.S. Bureau of Naturalization challenged the practice of naturalizing Armenians as U.S. citizens. Richard Campbell, Chief of the Naturalization Division, decided that Armenians were not "white," and therefore ineligible for citizenship. In Halladjian vs. the United States on December 24, 1909, Judge Francis Cabot Lowell, of the Circuit Court of Massachusetts, ruled that Armenians belonged to the "white or Caucasian people in appearance, not darker in complexion than some people of north European descent traceable for generations and always classified in the white or Caucasian race..."
The test for citizenship was none other than race - pure and simple. The petitioners Halladjian, Ekmakjian, Mouradian and Bayentz were "white" enough for citizenship.
This was not the end.
Once again in the case of Tatos O. Cartozian vs. John S. Cooke, V.W. Tomlinson and J.O. Stearns Jr., in Portland, Oregon, the Armenians had to prove in the federal courts that they were "free white persons" and entitled to citizenship. Once again the Armenian had to pass the test of race.
The court cases did not end the bias. Armenians faced stereotyping. They were termed "dishonest, arrogant, greedy, uncanny, and tricky."
Armenians who gazed at the upraised arm of the Statue of Liberty were extremely lucky. Only the most educated, those with American college degrees, understood that the 1921 Immigration Act allowed only three percent of the number of foreign-born of each nationality in the U.S. in 1910; that the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924, strengthened in 1927, only allowed 150,000 immigrants annually into this country based on two percent of each nationality in the U.S. as of 1890. Statistically this measured out that 12 of 15 newcomers had to be from Great Britian, Ireland, Germany, Netherlands and Scandinavia. Only 100 Armenians annually were allowed to enter the U.S. Genocide or not, it did not matter. That is the reason why so many of the first-generation Armenian American arrived as wives, sons or daughters of another relative or friend. Quotas did not apply to the spouse or children of American citizens.
Keep in mind that Haig Shekerjian, born in Ada-Bayar, Turkey in 1886, immigrated with his father to the U.S. At age 16 he came to the notice of Connecticut politicians by dashing into a flaming building twice to save some people. His reward was an appointment to the U.S. Military Academy and in 1911 was the first Armenian American to graduate from West Point. He was promoted to Brigadier General in 1942 and retired at that rank in 1946. There has not been another Armenian American to make flag-office rank on active duty in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps or Coast Guard since. Fifty years have passed since Haig Shekerjian made one-star and hundreds of very capable Armenian Americans have graduated from all of the military academies and the Coast Guard Academy. Hundreds more, perhaps thousands have entered the officers' ranks of all of the services through ROTC and Officer Candidate Schools, but not one in half a century has been seen fit to earn a star on active duty. Why?
Think again if you really believe that the "swarthy-complexioned" Armenians are considered "white" in many parts of America and in many of the offices where the decisions are made about people and their careers. There still exist the power brokers who believe that America is exclusively the domian of God's chosen few.
Racism in America has been a disease and sickness beginning with the business and shipping manifest that ordered African natives into the filthy, vermin-ridden holds of ships to be forced to the American shores as slaves. Racial bias carried to Thomas Jefferson who took the quill and ink from one of his slaves to pen the American Bill of Rights. It continued to the lynching trees and to the jury room in Simi, California. That jury's vote reduced Rodney King to the status of second-class citizen. For many Afro-Americans the decision brought tears to their eyes because it robbed them of hope. If this sounds familiar to Armenian ears, it should.
Second-class citizenships were exactly what the Ottomans inflicted upon their Armenian citizens. Second-class citizenship allowed Abdul Hamid II to "keep Armenians in their place" by murdering them. Their second-class status made the Young Turks audacious enough to apply "the final solution to the Armenian problem." All Armenians are aware of what the status of second-class citizenship can do. It has not ended.
Does any one believe that a devastating earthquake in Russia would have received the halfhearted response from Moscow that Armenia did? Rest assured that any Russian or Ukrainian enclave in the former Soviet republics that receives an attack upon its citizens similar to what the Azeris are doing in Artsakh would find overwhelming military power rushed to their defense under the auspices of the CIS. Instead the CIS troops abandoned the Armenians and helped the Azeri. Is this not classifying Armenians as something less than first-class citizens? How long do you believe the U.S. would have allowed Turkey to delay humanitarian aid to northern Europe? This last question is rhetorical. It requires no response. The answer is obvious.
Armenian Americans need to add their voices to the chorus of objections ringing out in indignation across this nation at the horrible excessive use of force inflicted on anyone and everyone. Yes, the police have a thankless, dangerous, difficult and crucial function in this society. But even if Rodney King had a pistol, which he did not, once the weapon was knocked free, once that man was subdued, one additional blow to his person is excessive force. Any additional punishment is up to the court, not the police. The baton-wielding men were vigilantes, not peacekeepers, not guardians of the law. Fifty-seven blows to the body, justified? Come on.
If we tolerate the use of excessive force against a black person, why not next for people with beards, then people with funny-sounding last names ending in "ian," or people who speak broken English or speak Armenian in public? This is not paranoia; it is an exercise of caution against raw unchecked power that expands and justifies its reason for being. How often have you heard a friend justify the circumvention of a Constitutional right to meet an end? Who decides where to stop?
Have you heard or seen a lawbreaker being called a French, German, Irish or English person? Not hardly. When Armenians in California were involved in a money-laundering scheme, we heard it across this nation as "Armenian jewelers." The major newspapers in Washington, D.C. related a story about a merchant chasing a would-be robber into the street and shooting him. They called the merchant an "angry Armenian." These are just two examples of where Armenians stand in the so-called "pecking order."
Power has accumulated to the upper strata. Basic human dignity, the Constitution of this nation requires empowerment of the people. Armenians need to join with their neighbors to bring the power back to the local level where the reality of living is felt.
Violence will not answer the questions raised by grievances. Do not be mistaken. Many of the rioters in Los Angeles acted out of frustration and the loss of hope. Much of the destruction had little to do with Rodney King. The jury's decision was the last grain of sand that triggered the avalanche. The momentum for the destruction began years ago. Yes, they were thungs who robbed, beat and killed people, then set fire. However, anyone who feels a part of society, anyone who thinks he/she has a share in that society, anyone with hope does not reduce his/her dignity to thuggery.
Our inner cities are teeming with gargantuan problems and unless a greater effort is made to bring the communities into the decision-making processes of solving some of the difficulties, more Los Angeleses are around the corner.
We may want to believe that the brutalizing of Rodney King was not racially motivated, but that is an exercise in self-deception. It is hard to believe that a white person would have been subjected to such a disgraceful beating and that a jury would consider the police action as justifiable force. Would anyone have called a white man a "guerilla?"
An injustice crosses racial and ethnic lines. What happened to Rodney King was a matter of basic human rights. Isn't that what Armenians around the world are asking for, as far as Artsakh is concerned?
Article copyright The Armenian Reporter International.

Trial Testimony Ends: the Tape Tells the Tale
Author Shifflett, Lynne C.
Testimony ended in the Rodney King beating trial without a word from Rodney King.
But the prosecution's position has been that the George Holiday videotape of the beating of motorist King by officers of the Los Angeles Police Department was more damaging than anything King could say.
"Without the videotape, we wouldn't be here," said prosecutor Terry White. "Who would be here is Rodney King, and he would be facing the false accusations of Stacey Koon, and he'd be facing the false accusations of Laurence Powell based upon the reports they wrote that night."
Sgt. Stacey Koon, Officers Laurence Powell and Theodore Briseno and ex-Officer Timothy Wind are all charged with assault with a deadly weapon and use of excessive force under color of authority for the King beating. Koon and Powell are also charged with falsifying police reports that covered the events of that March 3, 1991 night.
In closing arguments before the jury at the East Ventura County Courthouse, Prosecutor Terry White charged that Officer Laurence Powell lied 26 times during his testmony before this jury of six men and six women, none of whom is Black.
Referring to Officer Powell, White went on to say, "the only thing he told the truth about in this trial, I believe, is when he spelled his name right."
In all, 54 witnesses took the stand during this 2-month-long trial. There were also 128 pieces of evidence including King's X-rays, the defendants' police reports and, of course, the videotape.
Closing arguments for each of the defendants started this week, with the lawyer for each defendant speaking separately. There is speculation that the case may go to the jury by Friday.
Superior Court Judge Stanley Weisberg limited the options of the jury on Tuesday, when he said, "The jury will be voting on the charges of this case--guilty or not guilty--without the option of compromising on anything less than that." In a 2-1/2-hour closed door session earlier in the day, the defense team asked for the all-or-nothing decision.
During the entire trial, the defense for Officer Briseno distanced him from the other defendants. The prosecution declined to speculate on why at this late date Briseno would agree to such a high-stakes move.
Legal experts say the all or nothing move could hurt the defendants. Veteran defense attorney Barry Tarlow said, "My experience in multi-defendant cases is you have to stick together or you hang separately .... You cannot try a case in which people are lobbing grenades at one another."
No one is speculating about how long it will take the jury to reach a verdict. But no matter how long it takes, after the verdict is finally in, March 3, 1991 will be remembered as the date the first step was taken toward massive changes not only in the Los Angeles Police Department, but among law enforcement agencies across the country.
Most noteably, many agencies have moved quickly to incorporate a video camera as standard equipment on patrol cars. And, of course, here in Los Angeles, the incident sparked the establishment of the Christopher Commission, Proposition F on the June ballot, the appointment of a new police chief, Willie Williams, the first Black police chief in this city's history, and still to come, the much awaited last day for Chief Daryl Gates.
Great moments in history are not always painless!

The Atlanta Journal and Constitution April 30, 1992
HEADLINE: VERDICTS RETURNED IN L.A. BEATING Outraged leaders say verdicts clash with video images
Los Angeles - Outrage and indignation swept through much of the city Wednesday as citizens rich and poor, black and white, struggled to reconcile the
acquittals of four Los Angeles police officers with the alarming, violent images captured on a late-night videotape.
In a news conference two hours after the verdicts were read, Mayor Tom Bradley, speaking in uncharacteristically passionate terms, said: "The jury's verdict will
never blind us to what we saw on that videotape. The men who beat Rodney King do not deserve to wear the uniform of the LAPD.
"We will not respond to this senseless jury's verdict with senseless anger," Mayor Bradley, a former police officer, continued. "We will summon all the best in
ourselves to make L.A. a safe, fair and just city.
"Today, the system failed us," he said.
Los Angeles Police Chief Chief Daryl Gates, who was pressured to resign after the beating, declined to comment directly on the verdict at a news conference.
"I do not think there are any winners at all in this situation," Chief Gates said.
The executive director of the NAACP, Benjamin Hooks, denounced the verdict as "outrageous, a mockery of justice," but he appealed to blacks that "the
decision be met with calmness."
The Rev. Jesse Jackson said, "Rodney King's civil rights were violated and the whole world was watching.
"The message sent from Los Angeles today will not stop at the California border," the Rev. Jackson said. "It will give aid and comfort to every racist in
America."
In Washington, President Bush called for calm.
"The court system has worked. What's needed now is calm, respect for the law. Let the appeals process take place," Mr. Bush said.
Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, said he was shocked and mystified by the verdict.
"Like most of America, I saw the tape of the beating several times, and it certainly looked excessive to me, so I don't understand the verdict. All I can say is that I
don't understand it," Mr. Clinton said.
The verdicts evoked particular anger in Los Angeles's black neighborhoods, where emotions about the legal system have been running high since a local judge
sentenced a Korean-American shopkeeper to probation late last year after she was convicted of voluntary manslaughter for killing a 15-year-old unarmed black
girl after a struggle in her store.
But at Parker Center, the downtown police headquarters, detectives applauded and cheered. They shouted "Yes!" and "Go get 'em!" as the verdicts were read.
And at the Foothill station, where the whole ugly affair began last year, Officer Corina Smith raised her fist in the air and smiled.
"I'm elated, absolutely elated," said Officer Smith, 27, a friend of defendant Laurence Powell. "I'm proud to be a Foothill officer, and I'm proud to be an LAPD
officer. It's like this sick feeling is finally going to go away."

The Guardian (London) April 30, 1992
A TENSE Los Angeles was waiting for possible violence last night after the surprise acquittal of four police officers accused of beating a black motorist.
After deliberating for seven days the jury, which contained no blacks, declared the defendants not guilty of assault with a deadly weapon and using unnecessary
force. A charge against one officer, Laurence Powell, aged 29, of abusing his authority, was declared a mistrial after the jury could not agree.
The verdicts came as a shock to a wide audience that had seen the trial on the television and watched the now notorious video film showing the officers delivering
56 blows to a prone, unarmed Rodney King, an unemployed labourer.
The incident happened in March last year and provoked a crisis in the Los Angeles police, which has long been accused by racial minorities of regularly beating
and abusing citizens.
The trial was seen live in the black community in barber's shops, bars and restaurants as well as in homes. Members of a crowd watching in a shopfront cried: "I
don't believe this," as the jury read the verdicts.
The mayor of Los Angeles, Tom Bradley, immediately called for calm. As a black man he commands respect in the black community, but anger against the
police runs deep. The Los Angeles police chief, Daryl Gates, has set aside a $ 1 million "contingency" plan to quell what he describes as a potential uprising.
Mr King's lawyer said his client was "speechless - in a state of shock and outrage" but intended to go ahead with his $ 56 million private suit against the city and
police force.
A possible reason for the verdict was the trial's transfer to Simi, a mostly white suburb and the home of many police officers. It was argued it was impossible to
achieve a fair hearing in the city.
Throughout the seven-week trial the defence counsel for the four officers, Sergeant Stacey Koon, aged 41, Officer Powell, aged 29, Timothy Wind, aged 32, and
Theodore Briseno, aged 39, said they had been using "managed force". They said the blows were consistent with Los Angeles police policy to restrain a suspect
they believed could be violent.
Mr King was over the limit for alcohol while driving but not under the influence of any other drug. He was not charged with any offence but suffered five facial
fractures, a broken leg, and had 21 stitches for cuts.
Two senior police officers gave evidence that the beatings were justified and only one testified that it was not. He was Commander Michael Bostic, who stopped
the 81-second video in court five times and on each occasion said it was a point where the officers could have handcuffed and arrested Mr King and ceased the assault.