Slashdot Mirror
Students Put UCLA Taser Video On YouTube
dircha writes "As widely reported, an incident in which Iranian-American student Mostafa Tabatabainejad was tasered up to five times by UCLA police on Friday, has been captured by a fellow student using a video enabled cell phone and published to YouTube. From the Daily Bruin: 'At around 11:30 p.m. Tuesday, Tabatabainejad, a fourth-year Middle Eastern and North African studies and philosophy student, was asked to leave the library for failing to present his BruinCard during a random check. The 23-year-old student was hit with a Taser five times when he did not leave quickly and cooperatively upon being asked to do so.' In a story which has raised concerns of racial profiling, police brutality and the health risks of taser use, the ubiquity of video cell phone technology has given us a first hand record of an incident which might otherwise have been a he-said, she-said affair. While the publishing of the video to YouTube has given the issue compelling popular exposure beyond the immediate campus community."
...if after watching this video, you see what the LAPD(and by extension, the UCLA PD) are willing to do on camera, and in front of dozens of witnesses, what do they do without people watching?
And am I the only one that upon hearing, Police burtality" and "Caught of tape" are completely unsurprised the LAPD are somehow involved?
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
This was pretty sick. If you get hit by a tazer it's pretty impossible to stand up for at least a few minutes. That's the entire point of a tazer. They could have just handcuffed him and carried him out. I hope these "officers" go to jail.
...between him and the police at the very end where it's "time to go" is supposed to prove what, again? Context, people. Context.
I keep hearing people complaining "if he had just listened" or "all he had to do was get up." But seriously, think about it -- should he really have been tased repeatedly or simply arrested?
1. After being shocked repeatedly, could he even have been ABLE to "just" stand up?
2. After being shocked repeatedly, would be have been in a mental state to understand the cops' commands?
3. He was on the floor. An irritating act, but something deserving electrocution?
4. What if someone asks for a warrant, should they also get electrocuted. After all "all he had to do was let them search."
Put simply, this was WRONG. The kid deserves to be arrested, NOT electrocuted. To those of you who say "tasing is non-lethal," well, i dare you to do it to yourself. Post a video on YouTube to prove it.
This is why google bought youtube... they bought it for the power of its media distribution...
Does it go on forever?
Nice to see that the introduction of street corner cameras is being matched by our ability to watch them.
~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
A) You don't need "beyond reasonable doubt" in a civil suit. B) There were a couple dozen witnesses on the scene, most of whom appeared angry enough to testify in court. C) You get clear views of several of the officers' faces. D) The officers' voices can probably be identified.
On a side note, it'll be interesting to see how the officers justify their refusal to give their badge numbers (which was reportedly followed up with a threat to the person who asked). It makes it appear that they knew what they did was an excessive use of force, and were trying to hide their identities. That will look EXTREMELY bad to a judge and/or jury.
Say what you want about this kid's motives or lack of discretion, but the thing that struck me while watching this was that nonviolent protest (poorly represented or not) is truly dead in America. The widespread and almost casual use of "non-lethals" in these situations clearly goes beyond their intended purpose. Well...ostensibly intended, anyway.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
Four Officers... one kid come on.. They could have talked this kid into the handcuffs, while he was a jerk he wasnt exactly a threat.
Sorry the police are here to serve and protect, their actions are the actions of thugs who enjoy weilding power. So while I might not be deeply sorry for the kid, I am deeply ashamed of the actions of the law enforcement officials.
Storm
There was 60+ students standing around. If you ever see something like this happening, and you don't help, then you are just as bad as the police were in this case.
Nonlethals have just become a substitute for good police work.
The number one test of a good officer is how well he (or she) can solve a problem without resorting to the use of force. If he can look someone in the eye, figure out what is going through that person's head, and assert the authority or voice the reasoning necessary to get compliance with a lawful request, he has done his job properly. Resorting to force to compel behavior is already a kind of failure. Of course there are some people out there who are just hell-bent on harming others - that's why the option of force exists - but clearly that's not what Tabatabainejad was about.
And resorting to force to compel behavior when the person in question is not being violent and is causing no harm to anyone, well, that's beyond failure as an officer, that's failure as a human being.
The officers who did this are a far greater threat to safety on the UCLA campus than that student would ever be. I do hope the university administration recognizes this and responds accordingly. If they do not, then we must seriously question the administration's commitment to protecting their students.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
I really shouldn't even bother, but here goes:
First of all, how many people do you know that first of all would go through the trouble of getting tased just to get one belief out there? Second of all, how many people do you know that actually expect to get videoed just because they're shouting their beliefs in the library? Third, how many "morons" do you know that become "rich" because they saying what they felt was true so they were tased by police 5 times? Furthermore, he was tased while on the ground being told if he didn't get up he'd be tased again!
According to an article by Silja J.A. Talvi, "People who have experienced the effect of a Taser typically liken it to a debilitating, full-body seizure, complete with mental disorientation and loss of control over bodily functions."
So next time you think you're going to be wise and bitch about how people can make so much money off of such an easy thing, try it before you do it!
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
And this surprises you ... why?
I've seen cops and bar bouncers smack around people on various occasions, some of them deserving, some of them probably not, and in each case there were people standing around and watching. I've never seen anyone who wasn't directly connected in some way to the person getting the beating involve themselves unnecessarily.
Most people will happily stand back and watch Bad Things Happening To Other People Who Probably Deserve It Somehow. It's probably humanity's oldest form of entertainment.
To most of the people in that library, the whole thing was just like watching COPS, but in the ultra-ultra high definition sometimes known as Reality(TM).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Much like Kuroshin before it, the sign of the end for Digg is when they start begging slashdot's community to come over for fresher news.
Slashdot is a discussion forum. The power here is not timeliness, it's the audience.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
The problem with that video is that we enter midway through the true story, where he is down and been tazered once already. But why are there four cops around? What exactly was he doing that made them ask him to leave in the first place? It would seem that in order to be asked to leave from a library you would have to have done more than be speaking loudly or bring in a sandwitch.
That combined with how he was screaming about the "patriot act" made me more than a little suspicious that the victim went in with the goal of mixing it up with some law enforcement people, angry at The Man to start.
That video raises more questions than it answers, about both sides of the conflict. Next time, if anyone else is in the same situation can't you stand on a chair please!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I dunno. Maybe arrest him, bring him to the station, charge him with disorderly conduct, and tell him that if he causes trouble like that again, he's gonna spend a few days in jail? I know, it's a little bit "out there," but I really think this strategy could work.
Formerly GNU/Anonymous Coward. This message has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.
As a police officer, I have two things to say about this:
1) This kid sounds like an ass and I'm certain that there will be more than enough "He got what he deserved posts." I might even agree in the moral sense, but not in the ethical or legal sense, because....
2) This cop should never work in law enforcement again. This is inappropriate use of force by any professional standard. One post is not nearly enough to recount the things he did incorrectly, but I'll hit the high points;
General rules for any controlled encounter (one where you aren't in danger from the get go) include finding out what the issue is, telling the subject what he/she needs to do, and explaining what will happen if they do not. There is almost never a need to place your hands on anyone for any reason until you are ready to take them into custody unless you are suddenly attacked. This "officer" is grossly incompetent. Understand we deal with aggressive people that posture by yelling and swearing at us all the time - this should not disrupt the officer on bit. Keep. Your. Cool. So, screaming/swearing or not, this encounter should have been over with three sentences from the officer.
A) "Sir, per university rules and regs, I need you to show me your valid student ID or leave the library."
B) "I need to to show me your valid student ID or leave the library right now, or I'll have to take you into custody for trespassing and disturbing the peace."
C) "Sir, I am placing you under arrest." Then Mirandize him and be done with it. If he does anything but exactly what you tell him ("Sir, place your hands behind your back.") then....
Now and only now, if he/she resists (NOT if he simply fails to cooperate i.e. passive resistence), you may use force sufficient to subdue him to the point of having him cease to be a danger to the officer or bystanders. That's pretty simple stuff, folks. Basically, never be the first to use force, but when you do - do it quickly and overwhelmingly then STOP when he's restrained. You are a trained professional who owns the situation and NOT a street brawler.
From what I can tell, he never told the subject he was under arrest until after at least five taserings, some of which occurred while he was in cuffs and all but the first while he was on the ground unable to stand under his own power. This "officer" grabbed the guy's arm while he was leaving. Bad move, even if it seems like a little thing. Physical contact constitutes use of force, and any trained officer knows this is a big line to cross. I don't care if he didn't leave immediately - in that case place him calmly in custody early on and be done with it, no argument needed. You're the cop; you NEVER need to be in an argument. You aren't asking him what he wants to do, you're telling him. Never ever let a subject think they are in control. Arguing tells the subject they have some power.
What he did is inexcusable. If this power-tripping bully didn't have a badge what would you think of somebody tasering a defenseless person on the ground FIVE TIMES some while he was handcuffed and yelling at him to "get up." A badge doesn't free you from responsibility, it adds to to it exponentially.
This sadistic SOB gives all true professional LEOs a bad name and is part of the reason so many distrust cops. I've had training on most of the common less-than-lethal systems (lawyers don't let us call them non-lethal) including tasers, stun guns, pepper spray, rubber bullets and even conducted some training on the same. Unless this guy was issued a system with no training, he knows damn well the individual won't be getting up immediately after one tasing, let alone five. Frankly, I hope this guy answers for assault charges.
To summarize, to non-cops this might appear to be a case of overreacting during a tense moment with a belligerent person. To most professionals, this is about as vanilla an arrest as there is where the cop did basically everything wrong. So wrong, in fact, I intend to use these videos as a training aid.
This was so absurd that I actually laughed when the guy threatened to to taser the bystander who asked for his name and badge number. It's almost like he was trying to get fired and sued.
I read a post above that claimed the student involved loved to make trouble. And what I saw from the video would lead me to believe that is likely true. However it shows just how primitive the police force at the scene was. They were led into "abusing" the student and took it hook line and sinker. You could classify the person as mentally ill by definition he obviously was making bad choices that would only further his situation. Yet the tough pigs thought force would fix the problem. I blame both sides, a disruptive irrational person got the best of the police force. There was no need to injure him; a professional team would have kept him subdued and safe from escalating the situation and waited for time to let him calm down until he could quietly leave the area. Instead they strutted their big balls and made the situation worse. If they don't have training in this then I really do wonder if the next time I'm upset and the cops show up I'll take a few slugs for behaving badly. What makes me blame the police is their unprofessional handling of the situation. They're supposed to be "peace officers" but obviously they chose to turn this into an aggressive situation in which the hammer won. From the moment they arrived, many of them, they had physical superiority, there was no weapon, there was a person that wouldn't stand up. God forbid they seek other options instead of harming the individual to cement their power over them.
For those that don't know, this is very far from unordinary. I've hung with "bad" people and the police act like this all the time. They have the gun, they have the badge, in court they are a credible witness. Go up against them and you WILL LOSE without proof. Even with proof you are unlikely to win unless they kick the shit out of you while you stay absolutely motionless, even then you better hope your arm didn't move more than 2 inches cuz if it did you were attempting to violently assault an officer. I am exxagerating a bit but if you think this is uncharacterstic of police behavior you are ignorant (meaning that you just don't know).
Officers obviously need more training on how to handle a non dangerous situation. This comes up every time Joe Blow Black man with a rake is capped. They need to understand that having a gun, having control, does not mean using it to expedite the situation. If they have to spend 2 hours trying to calm the man down so be it. That's what they are payed to do, to keep everyone safe. Force should only be applied when NECCESSARY, and that is the downfall of this whole situation.
Haven't heard anybody mention it yet, but the kid was handcuffed when they were shocking him. That, according to multiple claim-to-know people, is against pretty much every district's / precinct's rules.
Also, the guy was in the process of leaving when the officer(s?) grabbed his arm, that's why he shouts out "let go of me." Now I agree that the guy probably shouldn't have been such an asshole when he was asked to leave the first time, which provoked the staff to call the "cops," but he definitely didn't deserve any of this.
Also, "this is your patriot act!" --> wtf???
First, we're not catching anything before the video, which firsthand accounts make it seem like the guy should be tasered.
Based on what.
Second, they repeatedly warned him before tasing him each time.
Irrelevant. They had no business tasering a handcuffed suspect for being uncooperative.
Third, according to firsthand accounts and the story, he was provoking the crowd.
Watch the video. He wasn't doing anything more than screaming "here's your Patriot Act, here's your fucking abuse of power."
Sure, it looks like the cops overreacted, but not to the extent that you're saying.
Yes, they did, and they belong in jail for assault.
Whether you or i agree on his opinions, he does have a right to protest and he was doing it non-violently. We don't know if this guy was just stirring shit or has been a repeated victim of profiling by the campus cops in the previous weeks. But what we do know is that the cops took it too far as shown clear as day on video.
Unless it appears people are respond to him no. In the beginning a crowd gathered (natural when something is going on). However they didn't become unruly until the Police overstepped their bounds.
Had they just arrested him quietly in the overwhelming numbers they had, then this wouldn't have occurred.
It was their poor choice that lead to the escalation of the situation and the danger it created. The guy acted like an asshole, they're trained to deal with it. They chose to obviously ignore that training and throw caution to the wind and go with the most violent and reaction inducing method out there short of shooting him or beating him.
If a police officer grabs you for no good reason then its assault and/or false arrest/confinement.
Just because they're police officers doesn't mean they can go around grabbing whoever they want for whatever reason just because they feel like it.
He may have told the security guard he wasn't going to leave, but he was in the process of leaving when the police arrived and grabbed him. As far as I understand trespass law, if he was making his way towards the nearest exit, he should have been fine.
Again and again, the police apologists come out in droves saying "Oh, but you don't know how HARD it is being a cop!" and "The guy was definitely asking for it!" I'm just going to say what I said last time this came up (original post: http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=192848&cid =15830849) Full text:
The perfect reply to this argument (which comes up every time someone mentions that most cops are assholes) is this: a McDonald's employee has more accountability than a cop does. As a 16 year old burger-flipper, if a customer acts like a complete asshole--even going so far as to yelling and cussing you out--you are NOT allowed to verbally abuse the customer in return in any way, shape or form. At most you can ask him/her to leave the building, that's it.
Years ago, I worked at McDonald's for four months and a very good friend of mine was punched in the face. Through a plate glass window. A woman tried to order at the pickup window, was told she needed to drive around again, so she punched through the drive-through window, hitting my friend in the face. If she (my friend) had hit her back, there's not a doubt in my mind that she would have lost her job. Instead, she walked away calmly and called her supervisor and the police.
Now, I'm not implying that the police shouldn't use force when necessary. I'm also not denying that they're human too, that it's a nasty, dirty job and I'm sure it's really rough on them. But you know what? Working at McDonald's is in many was rougher (if you doubt this, I could tell you some more horror stories... absolutely the worst 4 months of my life, period.), and yet their workers are held to a much higher standard than the police. Why is that? Why do so many of us make allowances for the police to exercise HUGE leaps of personal discretion, to bend the law whenever it suits them? It's a tough job, but they chose it and we shouldn't let them bend the rules (or ignore them) whenever they feel like it. I saw a TON of asshole customers at McDonalds, yet I didn't say a foul word to any of them. I didn't spit in their food either (no one did--they would've been fired on the spot.) I did my job as professionally as I could, regardless of how shitty I was treated.
And I was a fucking fry cook!
Please please please please PLEASE tell me we can hold our police officers up to the same standards as our burger flippers.
I agree with you that the guy was most likely being a jackass, and should have been forcefully removed by the premises. I was just pointing out, as you have, that there are far more civilized ways to go about it.
A lot of people are making the point that, "He was just begging for an ass kicking." Quite possibly true. However, it is not law enforcement's role to provide him one. The only, and I mean _ONLY_ time law enforcement is justified in physically attacking (as opposed to restraining) someone is when they pose a danger to themselves or those around them. Then they are to use the minimum amount of force necessary to subdue and restrain the person. Tasers are not tools of expediency.
Formerly GNU/Anonymous Coward. This message has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.
Wow... Every time someone mentions here something about ID cards, everybody is raising the Holly Privacy Bible. Today, A guy which has done nothing but wanting to keep his privacy is beaten by the police and you say it's a good thing ?
Terrorism is, you know, about, uh, terror I think. It seems its working with you. By saying you are happy that this guy got tasered, you are entering their game. You acknowledge that you are afraid of them. And beside, now they can tell: "See, Americans are not respecting the rights they are promoting".
What sig ?
Sure that's all true, but for which of those points would he deserved to be shocked the fuck out of five times?
he UCLA police officer videotaped last week using a Taser gun on a student also shot a homeless man at a campus study hall room three years ago and was earlier recommended for dismissal in connection with an alleged assault on fraternity row, authorities said.
UCLA police confirmed late Monday that the officer who fired the Taser gun was Terrence Duren, who has served in the university's Police Department for 18 years.
Duren, who was named officer of the year in 2001, also has been involved in several controversial incidents on campus.
In an interview with The Times on Monday night, Duren, 43, defended his record as a campus police officer and urged people to withhold judgment until the review of his Taser use is completed.
"I patrol this area the same way I would want someone to patrol the neighborhoods where I live," he said. "People make allegations against cops all the time. Saying one thing and proving it are two different things."
While he would not directly talk about why he used the Taser on the student, he said a videotape of any arrest doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.
"If someone is resisting, sometimes it's not going to look pretty taking someone into custody," he said. "If you have to use some force, it's not going to look pretty. That's the nature of this job."
A student's cellphone video of the incident has been broadcast around the world and focused much criticism on the officer.
But Duren -- who was back on duty at the UCLA campus Monday night -- said he can roll with these punches and wants to explain himself to students critical of his actions.
"In this line of business, you have to have a thick skin," he added. "I am proud of my service as a cop."
The incident occurred about 11 p.m. Nov. 14 in a library filled with students studying for midterm examinations.
Senior Mostafa Tabatabainejad, 23, was asked by Duren and other university police officers for his ID as part of a routine nightly procedure to make sure that everyone using the library after 11 p.m. is a student or otherwise authorized to be there.
Authorities said Tabatabainejad refused repeated requests to provide identification or to leave. The officers decided to use the Taser to incapacitate Tabatabainejad after he went limp while they were escorting him out and after he urged other library patrons to join his resistance, according to the university's account.
The video shows portions of the incident, in which Tabatabainejad can be heard screaming in pain when the Taser shocks are administered.
The tape, which has been broadcast on the YouTube website and TV newscasts, prompted widespread criticism both on campus and from outsiders. On Friday, more than 200 students held a march to the police station, while acting Chancellor Norman Abrams tried to quell the critics by announcing an independent investigation of the Taser use. Abrams said UCLA had received numerous e-mails and calls from concerned alumni and parents.
Tabatabainejad's attorney, Stephen Yagman, said his client was shocked five times with the Taser after he refused to show his ID because he thought he was being singled out for his Middle Eastern appearance. Tabatabainejad is of Iranian descent but is a U.S. citizen by birth and a resident of Los Angeles.
Duren said Monday that he joined the UCLA police force after being fired from the Long Beach Police Department in the late 1980s. He said he was a probationary officer at the time and was let go because of poor report-writing skills and geographical knowledge.
In May 1990, he was accused of using his nightstick to choke someone who was hanging out on a Saturday in front of a UCLA fraternity. Kente S. Scott alleged that Duren confronted him while he was walking on the street outside the Theta Xi fraternity house.
Scott sued the university, and according to court records, UCLA officials moved to have Duren dismissed from the police force. But after an independent administrative hearing, officials ove
200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
*disclaimer: I haven't seen the video due to restricted net access*
It's this sort of crap that's going to get a very useful and life-saving tool taken away from cops who use it right.
There's no reason to deploy a taser on someone who is ALREADY ON THE GROUND AND NO LONGER FIGHTING!
I have used my taser as a police officer twice. The first time, the wires broke on contact and I had to chase him. The second time, the guy fell to the ground and became verbally and physically compliant.
Tasers cannot be used as FREAKING CATTLE PRODS! They're a sophisticated, useful tool that is meant to incapacitate a VIOLENT criminal in order to protect *both* the officer and the offender from serious bodily injury. When deployed in a sensible, responsible fashion, tasers save lives. When used 3 to 5 times on a compliant subject on the ground, they don't help.
In Florida (where I am a sworn law enforcement officer), most agencies are not allowed to use a taser unless a subject is actively resisting arrest (i.e. fighting and/or running away). A large powerful agency nearby was using them on everyone for passive resistance (i.e. "I'm Ofc. Jones, who are you?" "Screw you pig!" *taser*)
The simple fact is, Americans aren't terrorists. Anyone who tells you otherwise has been corrupted by public education, sharing, or evolutionists.
Well, after getting stunned do you really think you got good control of your legs? If they wanted they could have just carried him out of the building without having to zap him even once, but what's the fun in that.
Huh, are you nuts? The person was unwilling to show his card. Fair enough, then escort him out. If necessary handcuff him. But don't taser and then keep yelling, "stand up, stand up, stand up" like a bunch of freaken drones. The student has a case against the police for excessive force.
h tm)
The supreme court has said the following: (http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/oct975.
1) the severity of the crime; The guy did not show his student card! This is not a severe crime!
2) whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others; The guy is a student who fell to the ground and did not move. He did not fight, nor raise a fist, nada!
3) whether the suspect actively is resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight; He resisted arrest, but did not run away. He became a clump of lead.
Put these factors in, and the security guards went way over the line and used excessive force. There is a civil lawsuit here. Some people said "why did he mention the patriot act?" Simple because of my referenced link where the supreme court explicitly said, "Hey you can only use so much force, which the patriot act nullifies."
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
You should watch the video, it's pretty clear from that that he didn't deserve to be tased, or at least didn't deserve to be tased over and over again.
Background (not in the video): After 11 you have to have a Bruincard. He didn't have his and was told to leave by a CSO. When he didn't leave immediately, they called campus police.
From what you can see/hear, the first contact with the security comes when they grab his arm - according to other students, he was leaving, having been told by a CSO that he had to - and he tells them to "get off". At this point they tase him to the ground. When he's finished screaming in pain, you can't see what's happening, but it sounds like they've dragged him to the door. There are a couple of security guards there at this point. They tell him to get up. He doesn't, instead trying to explain that he was trying to leave, and begging them not to tase him again. It's been pointed out that due to the effects of the taser he may not physically have been able to stand at this stage. They tase him again. He still doesn't stand. They tase him again. After a while, they seem to realise that this isn't getting him on his feet. At this stage, several students have asked for their names and badge numbers. One of them was told he would be tased if he didn't shut up. The officer was holding a taser when he said this. The others were simply ignored.
Now that the student is no longer deemed to be a threat to the (at least) 3 armed police standing over him, he is handcuffed. Before being dragged out of the room, he is tased one last time.
I couldn't watch the whole video in one go, so I'm not sure where the fifth use of the taser comes in.
I'm disgusted by what I saw in the video. Seriously. The taser was their first resort against a student who was - according to the other students - cooperating. Even after using the taser to knock him down, they didn't search him for weapons, they didn't handcuff him. They just kept on tasering. Once the guy's already on the floor and surrounded, I don't understand why you would keep using weapons to hurt him.
According to the article, the taser is used by officers when there is "a potential for injury to the officer(s) or others" or a "potential risk of serious injury to the individual being controlled." He was on the floor, shouting that he was trying to leave. He was clearly no threat to anyone, least of all himself. And the officers obviously knew that they were in the wrong, since they threatened witnesses with violence to try to buy their silence.
To me it's obvious what should happen. Every one of these officers should be immediately fired while a criminal case is prepared for torturing a helpless young man. They should go to jail under federal anti-torture law, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years.
I'm not sure where you get your information from, but University of California police officers are state police. They have the same authority that other state police officers (such as highway patrolmen) have to arrest or detain.
Whoa, slow down there.
Yes, the student was carded randomly, around 11:30 PM, in a library that is only for students, at least after hours. And not just in the library, from what I understand, but in the computer lab, where (iirc) there is a posted policy that you must have your BruinCard if you're using the lab.
This town has a lot of homeless people and the campus has a lot of younger kids running around, also. For security, it is necessary to do these random checks at night and remove people who are not supposed to be there.
And besides, how is one's privacy invaded if they're asked to prove that they're a student in an area that requires ID anyway? It's not any more of an invasion of privacy to have to swipe that same card to open the door to a dorm building, call the elevator, let yourself into a dining hall, or even enter your res hall after hours. The UCLA BruinCard is critical to access just about anything on campus, including said computer lab. I'm sure most campuses are the same way...
One of these days, I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
Not allowed. The library itself is closed entirely to non-students after 11PM. Hell, you can't even bring non-student guests into your dorm with you after 9PM unless you sign them in as a guest. There are people waiting in the lobby that check in anyone who passes through.
They take student security very seriously here.
One of these days, I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
I think it's like they're campus security, but then they went and got themselves deputized as police officers. So the have police powers and can act like police, and do most of the things that you'd expect police can do, but they get paid for and have their equipment provided by (and probably, their area of jurisdiction limited to) the University of California.
It's not uncommon for the 'Campus Security' forces at a lot of state universities to be deputized. The universities want "actual" police protection, as opposed to more powerless rent-a-cops, but the local municipalities don't want to pay for more police officers out of the tax budget, or divert police resources from the rest of the community, so basically the universities run a quasi-private police force.
Arrangements like this are more common than you think. On railroads, the Amtrak Police or other transit police ("bulls") are privately employed, but have police powers within their area of jurisdiction. In California, bus companies can do similar things. (At least they could, a while ago.) In most states, they also have to complete regular police training at the State police academy or pass an equivalency test. WP has an interesting discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_police
Basically, the line between 'security officers' and 'police' is blurrier than many people think, and has been for a long time. This isn't a bad thing -- the municipally-employed police don't have the resources to do many of the things that transit/metro/campus police forces do, and it saves a lot of public tax burden as well.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Can the last one out of the free world please turn off the lights?
No, they did the right thing by simply observing and recording.
Simply put, if they had interjected, the Police would have had a reason and opportunity to turn this into a riot, and flush it all down the memory hole. The guys with cameras? Arrested, and the "evidence" confiscated for the "investigation" of the "riot that evil Iranian Muslim terrorist" caused.
Instead they watched, recorded, and let the police do their bad things all on their own, and the cops will get theirs when the time comes.
Personally, if I was the UCLA students, I'd be carrying a camera everywhere I went from now on. Because if these cops are stupid enough to do this on camera and in front of a crowd, just what do you think they'd do in front of 1 or 2 witnesses in a more questionable situation?
I didn't try to claim the video shows everything, it doesn't. I know he was handcuffed, I just believe that should have happened much earlier - and that once he was handcuffed he shouldn't have been tased.
According to all the sources, the officers were using the "drive stun" mode of the taser. Rather than using the famous barbs, this simply functions like any other stun gun, requiring the officer shocking him to bend down over him to use the weapon. As with all uses of stun guns, it causes extreme pain, and uses a mixture of pain and nerve disruption to subdue a resisting offender - although it is worth noting that this particular application focuses mostly on the pain aspect. Considering that there were at least three armed officers present and that the suspect was on the floor shouting not "nonsense" or incitement (this is an accusation made by the officers - it isn't born out by the video and is directly contradicted by the students), but rather screaming that he had been trying to leave and begging them not to hit him with it again. What possible reason could there be for tasing him three times before handcuffing him? What possible reason could there be for tasing a handcuffed person? And if the officers were so blameless, why did they threaten witnesses asking for their badge numbers?
He didn't try to run away. He was trying to leave. And he was trying to leave not because the police were trying to question him, but because he had been told to leave. By all available accounts, he was on his way out when he was stopped by the police (I can't seem to find a police response). When accosted by the police he didn't try to run, he fell limply to the floor - hardly a perfect response, but not one that I would immediately associate with violent intent! If the police were trying to handcuff him, they could have asked him to put his hands flat on the floor. They could have overpowered him. They could have used their taser to subdue him and then handcuff him. Instead, they chose to tase him over and over again first. Why?
I don't claim to have a perfect response to the situation. But if I was a police officer, supported by two of my colleagues, I hope I would have behaved well enough to be comfortable giving out my badge number instead of threatening the student asking for it.
"sworn police officers acting totally appropriately."
So you think multiple uses of a taser even after the person is handcuffed is appropriate use of force for someone forgetting their student ID? And threatening to taser bistanders who ask for the cop's badge number?
Wow. Just wow. And you wonder why all of us outside the US look at you like you're monsters. BECAUSE YOU ARE!
-- sudo.ca
How about YOU try to respond to a trespassing call as a police officer, while surrounded by 50 idiot college kids screaming at you with an EXTREMELY suspicious individual also screaming nonsense at you and trying to incite the stupid kids to attack you.
So according to your account of the events an otherwise routine trespassing call had 50 kids screaming and ranting at cops BEFORE the cops had done anything? The crowd was not what provoked the situation, the guy screaming brought the crowd and the repeated tasering of him while on the ground is what got the crowd angry. Next, please find the quote in the video or other accounts wherein the suspect was inciting the crowd to attack the officers. Hint you won't find it, yelling "this is your patriot act, this is your police brutality" is NOT incitement to riot/attack police. Saying somthing like "get these fucking cops off me" or "someone do something" might be construed in that fashion, but nothing he yells is anything like those statements.
Another hint - he WAS handcuffed
Here's a hint for you, after the suspect is handcuffed and subdued it's excessive use of force to taser him again unless he is violently resisting. He's not violently resisting (key word 'violently') at any point, and especially after he is in cuffs. It's very straightforward in law: if the suspect is subdued, further use of force, in this case tasering, is unjustified.
The officers did what they were supposed to do when confronted with a non-cooperative individual who is lying limply,
Bzzzt wrong again, what they are supposed to do when someone is lying limply is subdue them and place them under arrest. Officers are taught numerous techniques for immobilizing a suspect and handcuffing them. After the first taser shock while he is on the ground it would have been trivial to handcuff him and place him under arrest which was not done. Are you seriously saying here that any time an officer encounters a limp person who doesn't cooperate they should first taser them? Yeah, that sounds completely reasonable and very legal. I challenged you to produce any police procedure, training manual, or law that indicates that is the proper course of action.
I agree the kid was being a complete ass, and yelling at an officer is never a good way to resolve things. In fact I will go so far as to say the first use of the taser may have been justified. However, once the taser has been employed the subject needs to be subdued, the officers chose instead to give him orders and tase him when he did not follow them (nevermind the legitimate argument that because of the shock he MAY not have been physically able to comply). A taser is not designed or issued to officers as a motivational tool, or to induce subjects to comply with orders, it is for incapacitating a violent or forcefully uncooperative suspect, the next step being taking them into custody and/or handcuffing them. Police training stipulates these are non-lethal takedown devices, not motivational aids, to be used in lieu of other uses of force when required. And the law also requires that any force used be justified and PROPORTIONAL to the threat. Tasings 3, 4 and 5 in this particular case were no longer in proportion to the threat, no matter how legitimate the first two may have been.
The force used in this video is necessary for some violent suspects, and in many other cases might have been warranted, but in THIS CASE the use of force appears to be patently gratuitous and needs to be addressed by a formal review of the officers actions and some form of punishment if found to be in violation of police procedure/the law, which it most likely is.
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
Ooh, the irony.
Maybe if they should have broken his kneecaps with their clubs, maybe then he'd wise up and walk away!
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Oh, im sorry I zaped you 3 times already and you still won't move. I guess I should just let you go so you get your way. Have a nice day.
I can't believe how stupid some of you are. Seriously.
1) If 3 officers are incapable of restraining someone who is resisting verbally but isn't even resisting physically, they shouldn't have a job.
2) If 3 officers are unable to carry a guy out of there, they shouldn't have a job.
3) Tasers and other "nonlethal" weapons are meant for self defense against a threat of violence, not for passive (albeit annoying) resistors.
4) Hey, you dumb fucks wondering why he still wouldn't move after the 3rd time -- many people's muscles are immobilized to the point of being unable to walk for about 10 minutes after the first time.
http://www.babysmasher.com
http://www.openingbands.com
Their presence wasn't logged - the ID was shown at the door to ensure that only students were admitted to the all-hours facility.
So how the fuck did the student get in? He was already down, at a computer, with books. If ID is required to be shown at the door for entry, why would he be caught LEAVING the building to begin with, unless he had already shown his ID and was granted entry?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Tasers and other "nonlethal" weapons are meant for self defense against a threat of violence, not for passive (albeit annoying) resistors
While I agree that this episode is a pretty clear example of excessive force, the above statement is not accurate. Although my department doesn't use tasers, I presume that the courts consider tasers as occupying the same rung in the ladder of escalating force guidelines as pepper spray. Police officers (I am one) are trained to use non-lethal force options such as these when the arrestee is actively resisting but not threatening violence. Examples of active resistance include fleeing, attempting to break free from a compliance hold, etc. If the officer were actually be threatened with bodily harm, the guidelines stipulate that he should escalate to the baton (as long as the suspect is not himself armed).
I can't really tell what's going on from the video but if the arrestee was already handcuffed and was simply not walking then use of the taser should not have been authorized. Realistically speaking, the courts tend to give arresting officers a lot of leeway because they feel that it is difficult to judge officers' heat-of-the-moment decisions when one has the benefit of time to weigh and reflect upon the facts. In my opinion, the courts give too much leeway. While there are certainly instances where the best use-of-force decision is not clear, the majortiy of officers make bad decisions not because they're afraid or anxious, but because they are bad officers who are either unable or unwilling to effectively balance law enforcement and constitutional protections.
The reality of the status-quo is that police work attracts high-school grads and GED's whose priorities are being respected and retiring with a decent pension. As civilians, you have the power to affect this problem. If you want consciencious yet capable officers, you have to pay for them. Force your local politicians to fire and prosecute consistently and have them pay officers enough to attract educated individuals who want to positively affect their communities.