Excerpt: "Many law enforcement experts said Thursday that the officers' tactics appeared to be a severe overreaction. Both the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild said they had 'grave concerns about the conduct' of campus police."
UC Berkeley Campus Police attack unarmed student protesters in front of Sproul Hall, 11/09/11. (photo: turnmovechange/Flickr)
FOCUS: Legality of Police Violence at Berkeley Questioned
11 November 11
UC cops' use of batons on Occupy camp questioned.
debate over the use of police force has reignited at the UC Berkeley campus after videos surfaced showing officers repeatedly shoving and jabbing screaming students who tried to keep officers from dismantling a nascent Occupy encampment.
The videos taken by protesters, journalists and casual observers show UC Berkeley police and Alameda County sheriff's deputies in riot gear ordering students with linked arms to leave a grassy area outside the campus administration building Wednesday. When the students didn't move, police lowered their face shields and began hitting the protesters with batons.
University police say the students, who chanted "You're beating students" during the incident, were not innocent bystanders, and that the human fence they tried to build around seven tents amounted to a violent stance against police.
But many law enforcement experts said Thursday that the officers' tactics appeared to be a severe overreaction.
Both the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild said they had "grave concerns about the conduct" of campus police.
"Video recordings raise numerous questions about UCPD's oversight and handling of these events, including whether law enforcement were truly required to beat protesters with batons," the two groups wrote in a letter to campus officials.
In total, 39 people were arrested Wednesday; 22 were students and one was a professor, police said. All but one were taken to jail and released.
"The individuals who linked arms and actively resisted, that in itself is an act of violence," UC police Capt. Margo Bennett said. "I understand that many students may not think that, but linking arms in a human chain when ordered to step aside is not a nonviolent protest."
Bennett said police merely wanted to enforce the ban on camping on Sproul Plaza, but were prevented from doing so by students.
"Students who linked arms were interfering with the officers who were attempting to remove those tents," she said.
Sgt. J.D. Nelson, a spokesman for the Alameda County Sheriff's Department, said he saw nothing inappropriate in how one deputy shown in a video used his baton. Nelson said it appeared the deputy was trying to keep students from breaching a police line.
Questionable Actions
Yet many experts said the officers' actions were at least questionable and likely excessive.
"Using a baton to go through a nonviolent crowd is as inappropriate today as it was in the South when they used it to enforce segregation in the 1960s," said Jim Chanin, a Berkeley attorney who specializes in police misconduct issues.
Sam Walker, a professor emeritus of criminal justice at the University of Nebraska at Omaha who has served as a consultant to the Oakland Police Department, said he thought the campus response was "unprovoked" and "completely unnecessary."
Using a baton to aggressively poke protesters can be dangerous, Walker said.
"The way they were using it, you're very likely to hit the groin or kidney," he said. "I think it is an excessive action and totally unwarranted in the circumstances we see on the video."
This isn't the first time university officers have been accused of excessive force during a protest.
In November 2009, hundreds of students orchestrated a chaotic, daylong rally against tuition increases, among other issues. At one point during the demonstration, protesters pushed a police line back by about six feet. Officers, with no direction from commanders, reacted by striking students with batons, using both jabs and overhead strikes, to re-establish the perimeter.
A review led by Wayne Brazil, a UC Berkeley law professor and retired federal magistrate judge, said the effort to push the crowd back a few feet was "incomprehensible" and "resulted in chaos, confusion and considerable violence."
Handling Civil Disobedience
The report urged the university to develop clear policies for handling mass civil disobedience.
Yet the campus' most recent crowd-control policy was published in 2000. It gives no guidance on the use of batons.
Avoiding all use of force is "highly desirable," the policy states, but "a variety of techniques and tactics may be necessary" depending on the situation and the available resources.
David Klinger, a professor of criminology at the University of Missouri at St. Louis, said people who see such startling videos online shouldn't assume police acted inappropriately.
"The question becomes, what are (police) trying to accomplish" by shoving protesters, he said. "Is it just a little jab or are they following through? Looking at the video, you can't say."
But Shane Boyle, a graduate student who was smacked twice while linked with protesters, said he thought commanders sent a squad of thugs to break up the protest.
"The one that hit me was going kind of crazy," Boyle said. "He was kind of fierce."
Boyle said he thought the footage had galvanized his peers and united disparate groups around a frustration with the university.
Chronicle staff writers Justin Berton and Nanette Asimov contributed to this report.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |












Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
My most fervent wish is that these PIGS soon learn what a violent stance against police REALLY is! Not that it would do any good at all. You can't educate the un-educable, and as Ron White amusingly stresses: "Stoopid is for-evah"
Time for we the sheeple to wake up, and quit falling for all the Tea Party style Karlroving/Kochsucking MSD (manipulation, spins, distraction). We've had a coup d'etat, and are now a fascist police state where any kind of tortrue/brutality is o.k. as long as our villainaire rulers keep their fortunes rolling in and their total power intact.
Give me a break.
I am all for law and order but he cops doing Wall Street's bidding (after all they got over 2 million dollars from the bastards at Wall Street) for their police fund, are going over board. In their riot gear they look more like out of space aliens than cops, confronting unarmed, unprotected demonstrators, feeling macho, just the right thing for the psychopaths among them.
So far the demonstrations are peaceful which I hope they stay this way. But..... there are millions of guns in the US in the hands of private citizens, pushed too far by the Wall Street stooges anything can happen.
NEVER EVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!!
Scary, for sure.
N.
Perhaps David Klinger's thinking will become clearer if a demonstration of baton-jabbing is arranged for him? Physical violence is never appropriate against an unarmed and non-violent protester.... It's even forbidden, if that protester is exercising Constitutionall y-protected speech. Here's one professor who obviously isn't qualified to teach!
Don't go there, ever, please.
Use evidence to make meaningful responses to things you don't agree with. Don't generalize, please. That's just what the people who act against the Occupy movement want. It's fine to disagree, but do it with some reasonable thought, not one-liner generalized questions.
Thanks.
N.
Sorry, lady, but YOU don't get to decide what is an act of violence. The people who decide are normal people who don't get their jollies out of beating up on defenseless people. And you don't qualify under either definition.
Someone needs to start a petition to get him in the PRIMARY and send it to Bernie and the NDC. Bernie's the MAN! He speaks for the 99% and he is fearlessin in speaking out and he is non-negotiable morally and politically.
HIS VOICE IS BEING HEARD all over the internet (if not in the media). We need a leader who cares more about people than big money backers and cowtowing to their payback schemes., We need a leader like who cares more about honoring his commitment and promises to the people than grandstanding for his own glory and profit. We need BERNIE SAUNDERS! Don't worry about his age. Judges serve until they're 75 and Bernie's sharper than anyone in the Democratic party or GOP.
How can Bernie Saunders get his name on the Democratic Primary ballot when in fact he is not a member of that party?
Says the voice of the Police State. Not stepping aside is considered "violence" and justifies a beating by police. I would imagine if the crowd then broke out batons of their own, police would be justified to use lethal force, by this logic. As this shows, we really do not live in a Free nation at all, and any threat to the status quo and the establishment will be met with force. Are we really that different than those nations like Libya and Syria? We'll see.
It's an outrage that when charges are brought and found to be credible, it's ALWAYS the woman who has to leave and lose her job, NEVER the perpetrator.
When the Dalai Lama speaks of compassion. When Rabbi Lerner speaks of compassion, they are speaking of a level of cosciousness that involves the heart. It is not in the consciousness of the policemen nor in the consciousness of the 1%. The level of consciousness is really the issue:
That what we do is for the good of the whole. It is not in the world. We are doing our best to evolve that which is for the good of the whole. Maybe that is compassion.
regentsoffice@u cop.edu
Do we wish to produce a standard format for people to send or do people wish to express their own individual thoughts?
alfredo.mireles@ucsf.edu
Please feel free to do so too.
Of course they are. What could be a better cover for one's natural inclination to bully than to be hired, trained, given a gun and be paid to go out into the public and bully.
Ignorant, mindless thugs have to eat too, you know.
Cruelty Personified:
http://www.wartoyz.com/page/WT/PROD/TT-FIG/TTL66008
Huh? Linked arms = violence? So what, by this standard, is her cops’ behaviour - manic-psychopathic frenzy?
see FBI link:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes#section241
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
RSS feed for comments to this post.