No ID - College Student Tazed - 3 Times

[Bob Hubbard]

Hmm.

More on possible excessive force used by LAPD
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/11/10/los-angeles-police-beating-caught-on-video/


Added: YouTube videos concerning LAPD brutality cases, including several clips, press conferences and such
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=LAPD+brutality&search=Search

 

[Bob Hubbard]

So. After finding these additional stories, it would seem to me that there is reason to believe that maybe, just maybe, excessive force was used, and in fact is used more often than not by some LA and Orange County cops. I've found a large number of additional stories on excessive force issues, with a good percentage of them being from these 2 California counties....2 counties that I will not be visiting anytime soon I might add.

I realize that being a LEO is a stressful, emotionally draining, and very often thankless and dangerous job, a job that needs to be done because people simply can't play well with each other in too many cases. But. This does not give them permission to abuse the trust that we place in them to as so many of their cars and badges say to "Protect and Serve". To the honest cops out there, you have my thanks, and my wish that you retire someday with full health and well being.

 

[shesulsa]

So Cal cops use excessive force a lot??? No! Sorry, Bob, but that's news for ... who??

And I'm sorry, but I think a Student ID Req'd after 11 PM rule for a college library *IS* appropriate and should be enforced ... though, not to the extent of abusing a patron which I think happened in this case.

IMO, they had a right to ask him for ID according to the rules of the library and campus policy, when he couldn't/wouldn't show ID they had a right to ask him to leave and even to corral him to and through the exit.

But I don't think they did the right thing in tazing him at all, let alone multiple times while cuffed behind the back, seated, and under officer control.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

No problem with the "ID after x" policy, or asking him to leave because he didn't have it.

Problem with the excessive force used, and threats to other law obiding students.

 

[shesulsa]

No problem with the "ID after x" policy, or asking him to leave because he didn't have it.

Problem with the excessive force used, and threats to other law obiding students.

Agreed.

 

[Cryozombie]

As to what is unreasonable to show ID...what is reasonable about being assaulted and arrested for failure to show it...or have it at all? When did it become a law that one must have ID with them and show it on demand to LEO's in the US? Last I heard, we didn't have to do that.

Bob. If this were out in public Id agree with you. The guy shouldnt have to have ID and show it on demand. In a PRIVATE building, which is open to the public SO LONG AS THEY CAN PRODUCE AND SHOW ID, that situation changes. You are, so long as you are in that location, be it a bar, a school building, or even a SAM'S Club, required to show ID upon request or leave. If you refuse, you are guilty of criminal tresspass. It's not a protest, its not a joke, its not a rights violation, its a crime. I had numerous people who failed to understand that when I worked for Hot Topic arrested. (not for not having Id, but for failing to leave on demand)

I spoke to a LEO that I train with about this situation, and she said that policy HERE, (I cant speak for CA) would be to remove him, and if he resisted, which includes the definition of droping to the floor and refusing to walk, or grabbing an object to stay in place, they are authorized to stun, or spray the subject so he will comply with a LAWFUL order. So if we assume that CA policy is similar, and there was a problem caused by his CRIMINAL actions (refusing to leave the premisis after being asked for ID) and the police responded, and the student resisted, I'd say that #1 that action would generate that response in keeping with policy, and #2 is expected.

If its a problem we should look to change policy, not the actions of the cops, who, IMO, were doing their jobs in an obviously hostile environment (just listen to the audio) and probably wanted to exit the scene as quickly as possible to protect themselves and probably the other students.

Tell me, in a situation where someone's breaking into your home, and you call the cops, and they come out see the guy by a window and ask, "Are you the homeowner here" and the burgler says "YES!" and the cops ask for ID from him to prove it, are YOU gonna tell em, "When did it become a law that one must have ID with them and show it on demand to LEO's in the US?"

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The 2 situations are different, in the following:

In the actual situation, the person was reported by several witnesses to be in the process of complying when he was assaulted by the police.

In your hypothetical situation, the police would be seeking to establish if the person did belong there. If the person could not present ID in this case, there are simple ways to verify ID. If the person says his name is "john smith", and the address is 25 mockingbird lane, the police can run his non-existant ID based on other factors, which would in most cases be tied in to the ID he cannot present, to check. They can query their database which should contain a physical description of Mr Smith, and other identifying information. My drivers license has my hair, and eye color, birthdate, and other bits that a casual criminal would not have. One would expect that anyone they give a gun and badge to, would understand how to ask for a name and call in an ID check.

 

[Cryozombie]

The 2 situations are different, in the following:

In the actual situation, the person was reported by several witnesses to be in the process of complying when he was assaulted by the police.

Well, I gotta ask... Were they Random witnesses or his friends? Because In the video, he certainly was NOT complying, and one post had a witness saying this guy was being beligerent on purpose, and that he has a habit of doing this. It was also stated that when he was asked to produce ID in the first place he ignored the request... that doesnt sound like he was complying, at least not at the begining and the cops probably wouldnt have been called if he was in the process of complying. I find it hard to blieve he went from not complying, to complying, back to not complying.

But even still, Assuming he was on his way out the door, and the officer took hold of his arm to do a walk out, and he jerked away and yelled dont touch me... (which we have to extrapolate from the audio and the witnesses since the video didnt actually show it) well... you make a violent move like that around a cop, and yeah, they are likley to respond poorly...

The "assault" by the cops aside for a minute...

I just cant see anyplace in this incident where a large measure of fault cannot be lumped on the student for his actions. My understanding of the incident goes like this: He was in the library in viloation of the rules for being there. He was asked to show id and he ignored the staff member making the request, and he was asked to leave, which he ignored. He went from Breaking the rules to Criminal Tresspass. The police were called. He was again asked to leave, which, depending who you listen to he either did or didn't, but we will assume he was, when he became, at the least from the audio track on the video, verbally abusive with the cops. So, ok, lets assume at that point they stun him for no reason, (again, we cannot see what happened at that point) and he drops down they cuff him and then he wont get up, he starts screaming about the patriot act instead. (thats not a protest, btw, its resisting arrest) So, the cops issue a command to get up and he responds, "**** You!" and continues to resist, they tell him to get up repeatedly, and he responds the same every time. So following what we will assume is policy for a resist they shock him again. He continues to ignore the command and gets shocked again. We pretty much know where it went from there...

Ok, so lets look at the situation from the perspective of how someone who wasnt being an *** would have handled it.

If he had replied from the initial request, "Oh, im sorry, my Id is in my dorm, I can go get it, but I am almost finished here, like 5 more minutes, would that be ok?" they probably would have said no, Im sorry, you have to go get it. Then, instead of sitting there, he could have said, "oh ok, let me just pack up here, and Ill run back and get it" and they probably would not have been so agressive and maybe not called the cops. But lets assume they did. When the cops arrived, we will assume he was walking out, as we are assuming he was from witness accounts, when the officer took his arm to escort him, he could have allowed it. Bet 100 bucks he wouldnt have gotten that first shock. So assume that they decide he didnt leave fast enough and are gonna arrest him so they tell him to get down, and they cuff him. When the cop said "get up" he responds "yes officer" and stands. Bet he avoids the other 3 shocks. And I bet when he gets to court his attitude and the testimony of everyone around him says "he didnt do anything"

Ya know, I really dislike most cops, and even moreso the way the system uses them. Cops should be the sheepdogs who protect the flock from the wolves, but in reality they spend most of their time snapping at the heels of the sheep and making the sheep more wary of them than the wolves.

That said... I can't fault the cops in this situation. You can blame the system if it says tasers are appropriate first responses in situations where the subject resists, and you disagree with that level of escalation, or their definition of resistance... but lets face the TRUTH... who made this happen, the cops or the student?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

So, what you are saying is, as long as you do whatever the person with the taser and badge says, you should be ok?

That electric shocks are a justified response to the spoken word?


I don't believe electric shocks, or pepper spray, or swung batons are a justified response to spoken words. Swung fists, thrown rocks, etc, most likely. But when saying "no" to a LEO earns an automatic electrocution or face full of capsayin, I think there is a problem in the system, yes. This particular situation deals with a police force with a long history of abuse and physical attacks on people, far exceeding acceptable response.

According to TheRegister:
"According to a report on NBC4.tv, he was given "a citation for obstruction/delay of a peace officer in the performance of duty and then released from custody". A UCLA police sergeant who saw Tabatabainejad after the incident claimed he had not suffered serious injury as a result of the tasering. He said: "If he was able to walk out of here, I think he was OK.""

"If he was able to walk out of here, I think he was OK."?????
I walked away from 2 car accidents. I wasn't ok. Nice to see though that the UCLA Police are also trained medical personel too.

 

[Cryozombie]

So, what you are saying is, as long as you do whatever the person with the taser and badge says, you should be ok?

That electric shocks are a justified response to the spoken word?

No, I am saying if he had not been a dick in the first place, or, for that matter, commited a criminal act this wouldnt have happened, regardless of whether the use of force was justified or not. Especially since, according to one witness he was looking for the most difficult answer to a simple problem... if thats true, he caused this intentionally... hes not a victim.

Secondly, and this is the MYTH that everyone is perptrating that has my panties in a knot, HE WAS NOT TASED FOR HIS WORDS. HE WAS TASED FOR COMMITING A CRIME AND RESISTING ARREST. His choice of language and tone probably didnt HELP, but thats not what got him tased.

Bob, you dont think a taser, mace, or a baton is justified response to spoken words. I agree. But what is justified response to criminal tresspass, refusal to vacate, and resisting arrest, which is what occured there? If what the cops did was the wrong course of action, how SHOULD they have gotten him to leave when he refused? And at what point do we treat a criminal in the act of commiting a crime like a criminal and respond to their actions?

 

[kenpo0324]

This prolonged and cruel assault on a student is outrageous and the officers involved should be dismissed.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Why? Are we still living in the 'Land of the Free'?

The student was not trying to access presonal, private information, such as my bank balance. He was in a school library. These tend to be public places. But colleges especially, are not just places of business. Campuses are where the students live. It is their community, their town, their home.

As I recall from my college days, anyone could access the main floor of the campus library. A college ID was required to access 'The Stacks'.

The articles state that they check ID's after 11:00 PM. This kind of indicates that earlier, the students are not required to show ID.

We don't know from these articles, but what if this student had been in the library from 7:00 PM ... he's doing his work, minding his busines and time gets by him? Some 'clown' comes up asks for an ID. I can imagine a response of 'go away jerk, I've got a half an hour left to finish this project'. To which, the 'clown' in question just knows his job duty says 'Check ID's after 11:00'. The 'Clown' in question then gets the police involved.

This brings us to the sequence where the police show up, the student starts to leave and the police take him by the arm.

Again here ... several unverified assertions. We don't know. I guess the point I see is, that if the ID is more important than the person, we have fallen quite far.

michaeledward,

Back in 1984 through 1990 I could not get into and use a computer unless I presented my ID for them to know where I was and on which station. In case of any damage to the unit, or the requirement to get a print out, (* to stop people from taking others programs or papers to copy from *) and also for security as some machines such as the 8086 and the later the 80286 were limited to certain clases that required the computing power.

The ID on a college is very important.

While being a student member of the government, I had to follow up with someone who filed a complaint. They said they were being stalked by a none student upon the campus. Someone who went out and bought a backpack and then some freshman class books and then proceded to follow women to class to and to follow them home. When appraoched on this, he had no ID. He was never registered at the university or any of the other local colleges. This was a security risk for the students. An actual in their face of being assualted and being attacked and possible being raped.

If this was your daughter or wife or niece who was followed or attacked, would you not be outraged with the Univeristy for not taking the simpliest precautions for thier safety?

We may have failed as a society, yet I go back to people not taking responsibility for themselves. In a perfect world there would be no need for any ID's. In a perfect world there would be no need to protect ourselves or worry about the protection of others.

I still say that until a detailed investigation with full data, the event was in line with the usage as long as they were properly trained in the usage of Tazer's and it was within their training usage. Until I hear more about what happened before the video I have to think it was fine, as long as procedure was followed. If evidence comes about that procedure was not followed then I will review that data and make another opinion.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Maybe we should close down all the libraries, and burn all the books. That'll solve these problems, won't it.

I understand your point, but this student is a member of the community the library is built to serve. He is the reason the library is there.

Maybe he can get a job being a janitor in Houston.

Yes just knee jerk and burn all the books when someone points out something that disagrees with your perception of what should be.

He a a student is required to display an ID to use it.

If a police oficer pulls you over and you do not have your driver's license on you, the police can be nice and escort you home, give you an appearance ticket, or impound your car at your expense and take you in and right lots of tickets and bring charges against you.

An ID is an evil of today's society.

I do not have a solution for not having one.

Maybe if Space travel was allowed and capable then people could move out and look at starting over, but I expect that when a population gets to a certain size that first names are no longer required, then last names will be used to keep track of people and or middle names, and then eventually ID's.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Yep.

And the fact that he was uncooperative means he should get tazed.

I got one for my home. When my kids don't clean their room ... ZAPPP!!

Michael,

I think you are being silly now. First off it is not legal to use on children. Second I do not believe for a second you would ever use one on a child.

I do believe that if you and othes teach their children responsibility and action reaction. or cause and effect then they understand that if you hit someone the will hit you back. If you are being civil disobedient, then expect to be treated as such.

 

[Rich Parsons]

And you have not posited any suggestion to for the function of a school library ... if it is not there to serve the student body. And the owners of this particular school are the citizens of California.

We have not determined the citizenship of the student. But we do know he was a student.

That he did not have his "papers" certainly justifies the response. That's the perfectly sane response of the ... whatever you want to describe yourself as.

I hear they need more Mounted Police in Houston. ... Interested?




P.S. And I didn't realize this thread was about ME ... and whether I am right or wrong. That you for valueing my opinion so highly that you must attack me. Although, I would rather you pay attention to the student body at UCLA. Or the Janitors in Houston.

Michael,

It is abotu all us. You exprss your opinion in a huff and take your ball and go home is a tactic of a child and also of those who try to take some higher moral ground approach like all the rest are below them.

You maybe higher morally than I.

You may be right in the long run, but where is your evidence other than in your mind right now to make these points?

First it was all about being Muslim for you. Discrimination.

Then it was all about having an ID. Hits at "Papers" another reference to Nazi German that leads people into thinking down a path. Nice usage of words without really saying it.

Now it is all about us attacking you, when you make a silly comment about us wanting to burn books, because a college and every college I know requires an ID for access to a computer room or library.

Show me your evidence that your opinion is better than mine, and I will review my opinion. In the mean time I state based upon the evidence at this time, ... versus you and others who just seem to want to crusade this issue.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Right. RFID anyone?

Gimme those verachips!

John,

Please see my response to Michael about knee jerk reactions and leading the reader and trying to take the higher ground.

While I do not want such a chip and do not approve it, an ID is required now by our society.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Maybe the next time you really care about something...care enough to try and say something...someone will taze you. Maybe they will even handcuff you and taze you because your body can't move fast enough for their authoritarian commands. Maybe they will taze you so long that someone will catch your screams on their cell phone camera and then post it on the internet.

Then people who disagree with you can comment on your behavior.

This is the danger of this thing. It's a slippery slope.

John,

If the police pulled him over for driving and had no ID he would be taken in as I have stated. How is this different?

Has anyone proven that he did have his ID?

Has anyone stated that the policy did not require an ID?

 

[Rich Parsons]

No one is arguing ZERO consequences ... except in your "your with us or against us" mind.

What we are arguing is that the response was disproportionate with the offense.

Michael,

As I have stated to me it looks like both you and John are the With us or against us.

There are others on this thread who are speculating improper force, or the change in a policy, or that something might be wrong, but they present it as such which is their opinion or that they dislike it and want to change it versus you are all wrong for thinking like this and it was wrong to have such a device and all who agree with this usage are Nazi's or looking for a government to come into their home and take them away.

Let me ask some qustions about policy what is the policy of the police department?

What is the usage of force?

Are they required to use the tazer versus a club because of the previous issues?

Are there issues with safety of someone might have AIDs or Hepatitus or some other blood born illness?

If the person left and walked out side the computer room to the hallway it would have gone far to show is desire to leave peascefully, instead he was inside making a protest, where someone has a video, and the video is dropped when ever someone of authority comes by. Like they knew they were not supposed to be taping it. Yet, instead the video hits the internet in hours and starts to get the media and other people upset.

 

[Rich Parsons]

The difference seems to be ... is that the student was already in the library working ... minding his own business. He was not, apparently, attempting to gain entry. This seems to have been started by a 'RANDOM SWEEP' - whcih probably wasn't so random. It probably happens in some area of the library every evening. BUT ... It's not like he was trying to get in to the library. He was already there.

And he wasn't removed ... he blew off the librarian ... and when the police showed up ... according to at least two articles linked in this thread, and the audio of the video ... was grabbed by the police officer while he was leaving.

Only FearlessFreep has offered any arguments against those facts, and he has not posted supporting links.

It is exactly the 'Heightened state of terror alert' that is driving this crazy behavior.

I don't care if Osama bin Laden is walking through times square, the Authorities in the United States have an awful lot of explaining to do about their behavior when using "Less Lethal" weapons against handcuffed, passive resisting students. You know, Kind of like trampelling striking workers with horses.

http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2006/11/54346.php

That seems to be an UNREASONABLE SIEZURE, something I thought was prohibited by one of those Amendments on that God Damned Piece of Paper --- as described by our President.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml

Random Sweep?

Do you have a specific link for this?

Why was security called in the first place? or was it truly a random sweep?

Also see my previous post about stalking and security of students.

 

[Rich Parsons]

So. After finding these additional stories, it would seem to me that there is reason to believe that maybe, just maybe, excessive force was used, and in fact is used more often than not by some LA and Orange County cops. I've found a large number of additional stories on excessive force issues, with a good percentage of them being from these 2 California counties....2 counties that I will not be visiting anytime soon I might add.

I realize that being a LEO is a stressful, emotionally draining, and very often thankless and dangerous job, a job that needs to be done because people simply can't play well with each other in too many cases. But. This does not give them permission to abuse the trust that we place in them to as so many of their cars and badges say to "Protect and Serve". To the honest cops out there, you have my thanks, and my wish that you retire someday with full health and well being.

Bob,

There might be the use of excessive force. Ths is true. But based upon the initial evidence and my experience in walking people out and dealing with beligerant *******s and such, it could be a reason response depending upon what happened before the video.

As to the comments about the Federal Building and security.

I have complained and complained that rights are being taken away from us. but people still seem to think they need to have these people in power, (* recent elections may have swayed the issue *), but it is the law of the land, be it unconstitutional or not, it stands until another law is in place or until the Supreme Court deems to review the issue.

There are ways to contact people to make your claims. If the issue is with the LAPD then call the County Sheriff of the State Police to file a complaint. One can organize an event legally upon a University to protest something or to promote a cause.

There are ways of doing this with out being in this situation.


PS: Can you send me the stuff for my site? Thanks