L.A. Noir: The Struggle for the Soul of America's Most Seductive City

The liberal Daily News and the Mirror, the Chandler-owned tabloid that competed with Hearst’s Herald-Express, started digging. They soon located the victims of the attack and presented their account of events of the evening. The jury impaneled to prosecute the case shared these newspapers’ skepticism about the official version of events. On March 12, it found only two of the six defendants guilty (on two counts of battery and one of disturbing the peace). From the bench, an irate Judge Joseph Call denounced “lawless law enforcement” and announced that “all the perfume in Arabia” would not be enough to “eliminate the stench” of police brutality. The officers involved in the beating, continued the judge, were in his estimation guilty of “assault, battery, assault with a deadly weapon, and five violations of the penal code.”

“The grand jury must end this sort of thing,” the judge concluded. “This should be the first order of business. And indictments should be rendered!”

Local Democrats unanimously passed a resolution condemning the “indifference of city officials… toward brutal police methods against citizens and minority groups.” They also demanded that state attorney general Edmund (Pat) Brown initiate an inquiry into “the person and office of Chief of Police William H. Parker, the Police Commission, and other responsible officials.” Stung, Chief Parker responded by announcing that he had “no objection” to a grand jury investigation. He also belatedly appointed a board of inquiry to investigate the allegations and review the report. This did little to appease his critics. On March 14, the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced that at the direction of the Justice Department it was opening an investigation into charges of police brutality against the department.

Belatedly, Parker recognized the magnitude of his problem. He abruptly changed tack. The chief now revealed that at the same time he had been publicly complaining of “unfair accusations,” privately, the Bureau of Internal Affairs had been conducting a top-secret, ultrathorough investigation of its own into the beatings. In an unprecedented concession, Parker then turned a 204-page report by Internal Affairs over to the city attorney.

But Parker’s story had some strange holes. When he was asked when the department’s internal investigation had begun, Parker claimed that Internal Affairs had launched a vigorous investigation on December 27. He neglected to mention that many of the officers involved had in fact refused to talk to Internal Affairs.

On March 18, the county grand jury began its own investigation into the incident. Its discoveries quickly found their way into the press.

“Boys Tell Police Beating,” cried the Citizen-News’s banner. “Jurors Told of Slugging on Christmas,” announced the lead article. “Wild Party by 100 Police Described, Youth Tells of Beating at Police Yule Party,” shouted the Examiner. Photos of bruised backs, blackened eyes, and smashed noses filled the papers. Jury foreman Raymond Thompson insisted (and DA Roll agreed) that officers who were suspects be summoned in for a lineup so the seven youths could identify their assailants. This was bitter medicine for Parker. The chief was further embarrassed when details of the initial Internal Affairs report leaked out. Its conclusion—“that none of the prisoners was physically abused in the manner alleged, if at all, while in city jail”—seemed hard to square with the photos of the men’s injuries or with injuries some police officers suffered that night.

Meanwhile, more reports of police brutality were surfacing. A complement of eighteen G-men had moved into the department, requesting access to files and questioning department officials about other allegations of abuse. Parker bitterly criticized the FBI’s investigation, intimating that it was an unwarranted Political vendetta orchestrated by local Democrats and the Truman administration. On March 25, Councilman Roybal announced that his office had received more than fifty complaints of police brutality (ranging from “mere slappings-around” to “hospitalization of the victims with internal injuries”) in the past three months alone and that he was convinced that many of these complaints had merit. Parker’s appearance before the grand jury did little to quiet his critics. One source told the Daily News that the chief’s testimony was marked by “a tendency to make windy speeches in response to simple questions.”