Disturbing stuff boys and girls.

[Dublin Mike]

Got this link off of Kevin Smith's page. Wow. I'll just let you guys get a load of it before we start discussing.

We'll be living in a police state before you know it.

edit: don't turn the volume up at work. Some choice language

Nice show of force by police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5g7zlJx9u2E)

[doublee]

That kid is going to get paid.

I can't profess to being tazed before, but I would imagine that once you get lit up you'd need a couple of minutes to collect yourself. I don't quite understand why they kept hitting him with the tazer gun. It is not as if he was posing a threat to anyone, from what I could tell it looked like he was already cuffed. It is like they were lighting him up for being uncooperative.

[Dublin Mike]

I don't get it doublee. I'm like you. They had the kid in cuffs. He said he was leaving, but they kept hitting him. Kept telling him to get up. I dunno, but I don't think I would be able to walk for a few minutes after getting tazed the 1st time. Much less the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. (was there a 5th?)

You can tell the kid was in agony. What were those idiots thinking?

[themush]

Now freaking way should that ish be tolerated anywhere. No one was in danger not the officers, the other students in the library, or the victim. Yes victim.
Amazing I had to hear about something like this on a sports message board. Am I the only one who hasn't seen this being reported on the networks? I very well could have missed it but, I would think something like this would be "headline news" worthy.

[Dublin Mike]

1st time I heard of it was tonight mush. Rumor I'm hearing is the big issue was he didn't show his student ID. Doing some more research into the matter right now.

[Dublin Mike]

Yup. It all stemmed from the kid not producing his ID. Unreal.

http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38958

[boston_aloha]

I can't profess to being tazed before, but I would imagine that once you get lit up you'd need a couple of minutes to collect yourself.
Actually, not true. Getting tazed is unbelievable pain (while you are being tazed) once it stops the pain is immediatly gone (like you were never tazed at all).

Now I don't know what the kid did in the 1st place, but why he did not standup when the officers ordered him to was a mystery to me. I couldn't count how many times they ordered him to standup. They should of just dragged him out in cuffs instead of tazing him IMO. Or pepper sprayed him.

EDIT: His ID? Wonder why he did not present it. This is an intersting story.

[Ravana]

Depends on the of taser; some seem to disrupt the nervous system and take you down. (Don't know for sure; just basing that on the reactions I've seen.) On the other hand, I used to know a bartender who'd shoot himself, anytime, for anyone... or let them use their own, if they had them. Didn't phase him a bit. As I said on another thread, pain is just pain.

If he was already cuffed, pepper spray would've been unjustified... and repeated tasing unjustified at the least, in addition to counterproductive, if they wanted him to stand up. Hitting him is out of the question in any event. If they wanted him down, they can pile on him; if they wanted him up, they can drag him to his feet.

And if they wanted to see his ID, he's gonna have a hard time reaching in his pockets while cuffed.... ;)

Seriously, though: police brutality is police brutality. This was inexcusable, plain and simple, doubly so if he was not resisting—and had not resisted (nobody's mentioned this; I can't view youtube, so I don't know if he did or not). Can you say "Rodney King"? I knew you could....

What were they thinking? They weren't. If they were, they'd've realized they were being filmed and not done this crap. They can always wait until they get to the station before they start in on somebody.... ("Pass that broom handle, would ya, Bob?" "Are you kidding? I'm not touching that... not after where it's been!")

[boston_aloha]

I've been tazed before (no guys... not by a cop!!!:lol:) It was for training - we were tazed and pepper sprayed. As for your bartender friend - huh... I wonder what kind it was - doubt it was the same ones cops use (if so, he's crazy!!! :D)

There are just many unanswered questions here. My question is: "Why did you not stand up when ordered to?" Not saying that justifies being tazed, but what was the deal? Also, if you didn't have your ID, why did you not leave when asked to by UCLA Security (before the cops showed up). I know when I go to the gym, if I forget my ID I don't expect to use the facility.

[da12ken]

I've heard about this story. The guy was being a total prick and security went overboard.

[kirby]

Listen to that retard.

"THERE'S YOUR PATRIOT ACT!!!!!!!!!"

:lol:


The loser in question denied repeated requests to present ID. Fact is he became progressively more beligerant in his DENIAL to act on a given order. Last I checked, police orders are not optional. As he became more beligerant a crowd was drawn to the scene and the officers believed the situation could escalate into a bigger group problem, so they tasered him. Fully justified. If a person uses resistance then officers are trained that they ought to RAISE the force level at least a notch higher than the offender, in order to control the situation and prevent it from dragging on.

Once tasered a person fully recovers in a matter of seconds. The jerk off was then ORDERED many many times to get up and he would not follow the police order. He failed to cooperate and was a major drama queen to boot. The police are not obligated to drag him out of the place. It is HIS ORDER to get up and leave. The officer's response here was fully justified.

Trespassing, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, refusing police order, desisting arrest.

But the police are the bad guys?

Hahaha, funny.


I wonder how they treat "disruptive" students in Iran?

[eman484]

I got to say that Kirby makes some very good points there. I mean police are trained to take any necessary means when it comes to awkward situations at schools as a result of the school violence in this country. The kid should have left when first ordered and not waited for the police to get there. Then when the cops came, he tried to run out, well obviously they weren't there just to tell him to leave, they probably had some questions for him. Then for him to yell "Get the F>>> off me" to a cop. Which he did before he ever got tasered. That is just stupid, now he is resisting arrest and being uncooperative with police. I say the first taze was completely justified. Then, the moron should have got up when they asked him too. If you are composed enough to ***** about the Patriot Act for 5 minutes then you can probably get yourself out of the building. I am not sure how many times police tazed him, but throughout the whole process of them asking him to stand up, never once did he say I can't. It seemed almost as if he was resisting standing up. I don't really know about tasers but what a couple guys on this thread said seems to be right. Usually after the taze is over, a person should be completely coherent. I have seen a bunch of episodes of cops where they used them, and the guys was right up on his feet walking a moment later. The kid dragged it out way longer than he should of. But, in our world, where we always want to stick it to the person in charge, I am sure this will be turned into the driving force behind police brutality. Give me a break.

Act like a human and do what your told when the police are around.

[Montrovant]

This video is inconclusive regarding abuse by the police. It starts after the incident has already begun, you rarely get a clear view of what is happening.

That said, it looked and sounded to me like it may have been a case of both sides being in the wrong.

The student (or whoever they were arresting) clearly seems to be resisting. It may have been a passive resistance, but resistance nonetheless.

The police seemed to have had him cuffed, I'm not sure why they didn't just drag him or carry him out. There may be policy involved in their decision, I have no clue. If there was not, I think they should have just grabbed him and pulled him out by force rather than the multiple tasings followed by orders to get up. That may have been abusive, or not; I've never been tased, I don't know what rules or laws there are regarding tasing, so I can't speak with any real knowledge about it.

I question both why the police used those tactics, and why the student repeatedly refused their orders. Very curious what will come of this, again, it looked bad on both sides to me.

[bama4256]

Nothing shocks me this day and time.:(

[buckeyefan78]

Children in Westwood have it so hard.

[BurghGuy]

Granted the tazing seems to be a bit overboard and the video is quite disturbing, I think we need to look at the full picture. The kid is clearly resisting. Although, part of the reason, I'm sure it's more than just the kid didn't show his ID. Perhaps he was part of illegal activities and the police needed to ID him. You never know. Disturbing? Yes. But let's just wait for the rest of the story.

[Ravana]

kirby has some good points... and some incredibly bad ones.

First off: the victim (and I will continue to use that word throughout) was in the process of obeying the order to leave the facility—due to not having produced his ID—when the police arrived:

The CSOs [community service officers] left, returning minutes later, and police officers arrived to escort the student out. By this time the student had begun to walk toward the door with his backpack when an officer approached him and grabbed his arm, at which point the student told the officer to let him go. A second officer then approached the student as well.

ALL the police had to do was walk with him to the door; they did not need to so much as touch him... and the "incident" would have ended right there. Which means that everything after that point was unjustified. There was no reason for the police themselves to require his ID from him at that point, the only issue being whether or not he was authorized to use the facility in the first place. (As it happens, it appears he was so authorized—he was a student, and was not trespassing. He just couldn't or else refused to prove it at the time.) Nor do I see where he "tried to run out" when the police arrived... that may be from a different report, but the above one indicates he was already in the process of obeying the order before the police showed. (And if he did try to "run," how did they catch him... before tasering him and without tackling him?)

The police didn't do that, though. The victim protested the police's laying hands on him—go ahead, tell me you wouldn't. Most of us would... even though we know better. You would talk back to them, at the very least, if possibly more politely: "I'm leaving, I'm leaving already, okay?" Probably you'd try to shrug off the hands, a reflex action at being touched/grabbed, even if you did not actively resist. Personally, if I suddenly found myself confronted, while I was in the process of leaving a building, by a group of police officers—which is itself evidence of intent on their part to make trouble for me, since it only takes one officer to eject a person, request an ID, or make an arrest—I would at the very least become quite vocal in order to attract witnesses to the situation... even if I meticulously obeyed every order they gave.

Any or all of the above actions can be interpreted as "failure to obey a police order," "disorderly conduct," "disturbing the peace," or "resisting arrest," however. Which is the problem with those four charges: anything the police want can be a violation of any of them. They may not hold up in court over the long run—but if a police officer orders me to drop my pants, stick feather dusters up my nose and do the macarena, and I refuse to do all or even any one of these, it's "failure to obey a police order." For that matter, if you want to be technical, if I'm ordered to produce an ID and don't because I don't have it on me, that too would be "failure to obey a police order"—even though it's physically impossible to obey the order at that point. (I don't know whether the victim had his ID on him or not; the story I read doesn't say.) And I know that, if I told the officer that I didn't have my ID with me and he kept demanding it anyway, I'd become "progressively more belligerent" in telling him so, as I likely would if I was in the process of trying to obey the original order to leave when they came up and started hassling me instead of simply enforcing that order. Again, I don't know who said what to whom at or prior to this point... and all accounts that do are based on eyewitness reports, so I doubt anybody else is completely clear on it either. The filming, as I understand it, had not yet begun at this point.

(Kirby) As he became more beligerant a crowd was drawn to the scene and the officers believed the situation could escalate into a bigger group problem, so they tasered him.

As he became more belligerent... due to their unreasonable demands. Look, here's the one unquestionable mistake the police made in all this, one I think even Kirby will agree with if he's as familiar with police procedure as he appears to be. Take it outside. The police were flaming idiots to not just follow the kid out of doors before confronting him; it would have been as easy there, far less likely to draw a crowd—at 11:30 PM, there would've been far more students inside the building than outside, and plenty more room for them to be less "crowded" outside in any event—and in all likelihood, wouldn't have drawn a crowd at all, since nobody in the building would've had an special reason to follow them out. That was just sloppy... or else it was the police who were being the "drama queens" here, as someone else put it. (Though I wouldn't be at all surprised if the victim was, too... why not, when it reached that point?)

It was at this point that the officers shot the student with a Taser for the first time, causing him to fall to the floor

Sounds like the "paralytic" kind, though I really don't know if tasers do that or it's just a reaction some people have to them. (As for my bartender friend, it would probably be more correct to describe his device as a "stun gun"—a handheld device that needs to be pressed against the victim; these are generally significantly less potent than the kind that are fired from a distance and trail wires. Again, since I don't have access to the video, I don't know which was employed here... but the LAPD definitely used the latter in the Rodney King case: you can see one of them rolling the wires back up in that video. And of course this had to happen in L.A. too....) If so—or if this was even a reasonably common reaction to the ones they were using—then they were being idiots by tasing him at the same time as trying to get him to his feet later in the action. I assume they were using the "stun gun" variety, since those can be discharged repeatedly, while the "wire" variety generally needs to be reloaded... but it was still unnecessary, inappropriate to use on an already cuffed suspect who was not being violent, and, as I said if they at all expected or even occasionally encountered "paralytic" responses, counterproductive.

As for not simply grabbing him and dragging him to his feet—how often have we seen police do precisely this to passive resisters? You don't see police going about tasing people at sit-ins or other protests where they are trying to get themselves arrested... even though all the same conditions apply: such people are resisting arrest, refusing to obey orders, often refuse to produce ID (how many "Karen Silkwoods" have been arrested at one time?) and are generally shouting slogans at the police in question. So none of these are excuses. If they had the victim sufficiently subdued in order to cuff him, he couldn't have been resisting too hard; they had already laid hands on him... what was their problem with grabbing him and either hauling him up or just plain dragging him off? He was not presenting a danger to anyone, he was not (so far as I can tell) being violent in any way; the force used was completely disproprotionate to the situation. Manhandling him away from the "growing crowd" would have been "a notch higher" on the force level; the police in this instance cranked the dial three or four notches higher... far more than was needed or appropriate. Saying that "the police are not obligated to drag him out of the place" is incorrect: they cannot continue to increase the force level indefinitely—that implies that they could've just gotten tired of the situation and shot the guy. Which is not true. At some point, they do become "obligated" to pick him up and drag him off... or else give up and leave. So why not do this earlier—and not give the victim the chance to become overly dramatic, draw a crowd and create the situation they found themselves in?

Laila Gordy, a fourth-year economics student who was present in the library during the incident, said police officers threatened to shoot her with a Taser when she asked an officer for his name and his badge number.

Now that was totally unjustified. What was the officer's beef with identifying himself? Yes, I know, the police were trying to get the "crowd" do disperse—but that's not the way to do it: that will only inflame them and make matters worse. The "crowd" is not indicated as being violent or threatening in any way, and a request for an officer to identify himself is perfectly reasonable. This is a major failing of police in many situations: the use of disproportionate or unnecessary force against people who are clearly bystanders. I know people who were pepper-sprayed while sitting on their porches watching ongoing police actions across the street, for "failing to obey police orders" to go inside their houses. They had been sitting on said porch for the entire time... on their own property, not becoming involved in any way, not even yelling things at the police. This is not a way to maintain good community relations. And we wonder why people are reluctant to call the police, to "get involved"? The officer in question in this instance also refused to identify himself following the spraying. I don't know if police procedures require him to do so, but I sure thought they did, and they ought to if they don't. Under no circumstances does police procedure authorize threatening a person who makes such a request, though, unless that person is physically interfering with the officer in question—grabbing his arm and refusing to let go, for instance.

No matter how you spin this, the police made mistakes at the very least, and did use force inappropriate to the situation and threat level. Which amounts to "brutality" in my book. Was the victim acting inappropriately as well? Probably. All that means is that he accumulates additional charges against himself. It does not mean that he should be tasered, sprayed, struck or anything else that did or could have happened in the situation. The police, by not ending the incident in the most expedient manner possible, created the situation they found themselves in... and created the potential for greater escalation, as the crowd or the police themselves became increasingly frustrated with the proceedings. (It is this frustration that is the source of most incidences of excessive force—the police should be aware of this and avoid allowing the situation to proceed any longer than the minimum necessary, precisely to avoid their own frustration mounting to dangerous levels.) Threatening to taser bystanders is an indication of just how far the situation had already gone, and how far the level of frustration had mounted in the police themselves.

I believe that the vast majority of police officers are good people; I personally have never had any problems with any I've encountered. It's only a few who do things like this—and only occasionally, usually due to frustration, as I've said—that end up giving police officers in general a bad name. Which is why they should never do this in the first place. They are supposed to be trained to handle this kind of situation; clearly, that training was forgotten here. Perhaps tasing the victim once was justifiable; anything that happened after the cuffs were on was not, plain and simple.

As for whether it was "more than just the kid didn't show his ID"—actually, I doubt it was... barring one question I'm saving for the end. Nothing to date has indicated anything "more" than that... that, plus the police allowing the situation to get out of hand. It's easy enough to create an upward spiral in such situations... again, the police are supposed to be trained to avoid allowing any such thing to occur. This was a failure on their part, no matter what the victim did. He could've been a wanted terrorist, for all I care—the situation was still mishandled. Arrest procedure is the same for everyone, traffic offender or mass murderer. If he wasn't armed—and he certainly wasn't after he was cuffed—and wasn't being violent—again, after he was cuffed—then there was no reason for the police to act as they did.

Now for that question—two questions, though the first one could probably have taken care of it. I've hesistated to ask, and have them left off until now so as not to color anybody's perception of the issue, which is a failure of procedure. I don't need the answers in order to address that issue. And I don't know the answers because I don't have access to the video. But I'm going to ask now....

What color was the victim's skin? And did he speak with an accent?

[boston_aloha]

Are you serious? I couldn't even get through half of that crap ^

Think about this, you say they could of escorted him out, etc. Did you even consider that if he is not a student there (and he had no ID to prove it) that he was tresspassing and broke the law.

As far as the police are concerned he broke the law until he can prove he is a student there. The second he blew up at them "don't touch me!" he went into a hostile state. This idiot should of had his ID on him. If not, go home and get it, and then return (as I said before - I don't show up at the gym without my ID and expect to get in). This whole thing most likely could of been avoinded (IMO) if he cooperated with the police and said "I am a student, I forgot my ID, etc. (I'm sure someone could check his name and prove that). But instead he wanted to get loud and was prob being a jerk to those UCLA security guards (why else would they call the police).

And that crap about the student that asked for a badge number and said she was threatened... I don't believe that. I think she's just trying to get in the paper or whatever. I clearly heard on the video someone (maybe not her) say "officer we want you badge number" and the officer said "don't worry you'll get all that".

This quote of yours is my favorite:
Any or all of the above actions can be interpreted as "failure to obey a police order," "disorderly conduct," "disturbing the peace," or "resisting arrest," however. Which is the problem with those four charges: anything the police want can be a violation of any of them. They may not hold up in court over the long run—but if a police officer orders me to drop my pants, stick feather dusters up my nose and do the macarena, and I refuse to do all or even any one of these, it's "failure to obey a police order."
Take some time and go look up the difference between a "lawful" order and an "unlawful" order.

[Tarkus]

A plain & simple case of Dumber & Dumber...

Dumb:

The kid was an idiot for not doin' what he was told. It's common sense to know that fightin' the cops comes to a bad end. Besides, like Steve said, he had to have been a pain in the ass to the security for the cops to be called & if he was willing to go, like some think when he said he was going to the cops, why didn't he go when security said to go? It's obvious he refused then or the cops wouldn't have had to be called.

Dumber:

Here's supposed well trained officers of the law that can't handle taking out a scrawny college kid. Not only do they not just carry or drag him out but they insist on tazing repeatedly to the point that they were creating a possible mob action in response to their actions. They were over-the-top & out of control for that type of situation.

Neither side is innocent now matter what the details are. Kid doesn't have his pass that's required, go get it & quit bein' a punk. If the cops need to react to a belligerent kid that's cuffed & won't go, hog tie him & carry him out with an officer at each arm/leg.

No excuses necessary for either side IMO. By the way, impressive stamina on that post, Ravana....:thumbup:

[Ravana]

IF he was not a student, he was trespassing, boston_aloha. Sources I've seen said he was.

No ID? Problem, sure:
If not, go home
Story said that's exactly what he was doing when accosted. (It would help if you did read the whole post, dude.)

Take some time and go look up the difference between a "lawful" order and an "unlawful" order.

I know the difference. Problem is, when the officer's giving you the order, it doesn't matter... follow it or it's "failure to obey." You can contest the legitimacy of the order in court—in the meantime, they've got a real violation to hold you on.

Tarkus is correct. I'm not making excuses for the student; he shouldn't have done at least some of what he did, possibly (probably) shouldn't've done any of it. I'm saying that there is no excuse for what the police did. "Dumber" is dead on.

Thanks, Tarkus. Oh, and get used to my "stamina": ask anybody from the CBS boards about it. Hope the servers here don't have too limited a capacity.... :lol:

[kirby]

You're full of hot air, Rav.

The criminal in question is no victim. Again, trespassing, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, refusing police order, resisting arrest are the violations I see.

Your claim that he was initially "accosted" is ridiculous. Understand that the police were CALLED to the scene for a reason. Since he would not produce ID to show that he was lawfully allowed to be in the library there was no choice but to view the guy as a trespasser. The officer put his hand on him as he was moving toward the door and he spazzzzzed out......like TOTALLY, man. Look, I don't know what kind of reality you live in, but the police are in effect THE LAW. End of story. If someone freaks on the police like he did it's not going to end nicely for him. Claiming he is some sort of victim is just plain dumb.

The police has a job to do, and they were dealing with a potential mob situation. That being so, it is ridiculous to assert that they should be obligated to show idenitifcation to people watching the scene. Geez, get a grip, guy.

As for repeatedly tasering the loser, it was handled properly. They tasered him, let him recoup, and then ordered him up to leave. He would NOT obey a given order. In fact, he only became more hysterical and disobedient. If officers are to a point of needing to carry someone out of somewhere then they need to either bind him well or hogtie him to avoid kicking, flailing, and the possibility of an officer being injured -- or the criminal getting lose.

So either taser him again, or hogtie him and carry him out. You like the idea of a hogtie for that punk? Ok, well, the police chose the taser. Deal with it.

The criminal was of Iranian family background, so I assume his skin was darkish. Accent? I don't know. Hard to tell, what with him screaming like a little girl the whole time.

[NYG Babe 28]

That video was quite disturbing but the thing is you never really see very clearly what is going on. It seems that both sides over reacted. The boy when asked for ID did not produce any and was asked to leave... which he didn't do. That was why the police were called in the first place. Once the police arrived the student did escalate the situation by refusing to leave when asked to leave, then resisting arrest, then disturbing the peace by causing the scene in the library. I think the police rightfully took actions to remove him from the scene and deescalate the situation. Do I think he needed to be tased 7+ times... NO. I think the police went overboard there and for that I think they were wrong. He could have been tased once as a warning and physically removed by the police. Tasing him did not help him to leave and continous tasing of him hindered him even further and caused more chaos amongst the on lookers which was defeating their entire purpose.

After researching this situation students stated that the cops also started threatening to tase witnesses that asked for the cops badge numbers. Anyone has the right to ask for a police officers badge number as they feel necessary and a cop is obligated by law to give them this... and that is without threatening bodily harm on the person. If this is the case this was again wrong of the police to act in that unprofessional manner.

Every situation is different and its hard to judge who is right and wrong... and often it isn't simply black and white. Police have a tough job these days that is for sure. That being said I have personally witnessed and been victim of police brutality and the use of unnecessary force. One was during the Penn State Riots. I will not go into detail as much of the force that was used was quite necessary considering the escalation of the situation... but I had gotten trapped in the chaosness as many others had too and had difficulty escaping. I witnessed other students who were scared, lost and drunk sucuumb to being beaten unmercilously by the cops with their billy clubs. I too was almost was one of them but luckily I was able to run blindly through the streets my eyes stinging with pepper spray.

The other incident which I was involved in was in Philadelphia during Greek Picnic. I was on my way to see my friends band play and I had to walk through South street to get there. The walkways were set up like we were cattle being herded. As I tried to make my way through the crowds and chaos. I was grabbed by 2 guys (the size of NFL linebackers) and harassed/molested. I screamed for help but no one helped. I finally fought them off and made a mad dash for the street which was blocked off. I ran under the ropes and the cops start screaming at me to get back on the sidewalk. I am hysterical and screaming for help. The cop continues to yell at me ignoring my pleas so I run up ahead (so I would not be near the guys that had attacked me) and then went back under the ropes onto the sidewalk. The second I get back under the ropes I am seized from behind by a police officer. He gets in my face and starts yelling at me. I start trying to explain what happened. He twists my arms behind my back and throws me up against a wall. He continues yelling and spitting in my face and telling me that he is "going to smack my pretty little face off." This other cop blockaded my friend who was with me so she couldn't get to me or see what was going on. It wasn't till another cop sauntered over and saw what was going on. I pleaded with the other cop to help me and he called the guy who was on me to get off. He apologized and escorted me to the bar my friends band was playing at.

So do I think cops overreact and abuse their power... you bet your A$$ I do. But just b/c some do it does not mean all of them do. Like anything there are good cops and bad cops.

As for the event as UCLA -none of us actually witnessed this event so it is all "he said she said "so it is hparticularly hard to say who is right and who is wrong... most likely it is a bit of both.

Sorry I went off there. :uhoh:

[boston_aloha]

IF he was not a student, he was trespassing, boston_aloha. Sources I've seen said he was.

No ID? Problem, sure:

Story said that's exactly what he was doing when accosted. (It would help if you did read the whole post, dude.)
I read the whole post dude... No doubt I know he was a student - but my point was that the police and UCLA security don't know that. He couldn't prove it so they have to assume he is not until he shows them proper ID. Or anybody could walk in there and use the facilities and then say "Oh I'll go get my ID".

I don't buy the story he was going home to get his ID. I serioulsy doubt he left on their first request. "Oh, let me go home and get it"?? No way - he had to of put up a little fight and thats why the police were called. I bet he wanted to finish what he was doing there and that led to the incident. But I don't know for sure.

Has anybody seen any follow up story on this?

[PPKA]

does Sports Central have speed cursers?

he's so Ravana!

what would have happened if they let him go? either those cops had a bit to much energy to spare or something had to happen long before the confrontation with the cops to set this in motion.

it is possible that he told faculty to go f...... themselves. that would about do it for me. at that point I would ask the cops to get him out now!

and that would explain the courtesy grab.

[ncoastraider]

If the kid wouldn't stand up when told they should have picked him up and carried him to the nearest elevator and beat him. No need to bust the cops chops when they're just doing their job. I've told my kids if they get caught up in some F'd up situation like that to cooperate with the coppers and everything should go smooth and pain free.

[buckeyefan78]

If the kid wouldn't stand up when told they should have picked him up and carried him to the nearest elevator and beat him.

Raider justice perhaps?

:lol:

Just joshin' ya. Welcome to the boards.

[Ravana]

Not buying it, folks.

Your claim that he was initially "accosted" is ridiculous.

I didn't say that at all. He was initially asked for his ID, didn't produce one, then, while security went for the police, he packed up and was on his way out—obeying the order!—when he was accosted, and I will persist in using that word, by the police. Again, all they had to do was let him go: story over. If they didn't want to do that—and I agree, they may have had reasons not to—they should've escorted him outside, without grabbing him, then asked again for his ID. If they felt they had reason to do anything else to them at that point—which, I think, most police would not have, even if he failed to produce his ID, unless UCLA said they wanted to press charges for trespassing—then they could cuff him and take him away.

The police has a job to do, and they were dealing with a potential mob situation.

Of their own creation. They screwed up. Why can't you admit that? I'm perfectly willing to admit that the student in question should've acted differently... that's not the point. The behavior of the police was unnecessary and over the top.

That being so, it is ridiculous to assert that they should be obligated to show idenitifcation to people watching the scene.

I disagree completely. Anybody, at any level, in law enforcement should be required to produce ID upon demand, unless he/she is physically involved in action at that moment... in which case he/she should produce it at the first possible opportunity thereafter. Besides, the officer wasn't requested to "show" identification, just give name and badge number—which can be done verbally... every bit as easily as threatening to taser the person making the request. (I leave it as open whether or not that actually happened, since I haven't seen the video. But see NYGBabe's response on this.) Peace officers, officers of the law, do not have the right to remain anonymous.

As for repeatedly tasering the loser, it was handled properly.

Hardly. As you say yourself: "If officers are to a point of needing to carry someone out of somewhere then they need to either bind him well or hogtie him...." Not even that: arrests are made all the time where the person is merely cuffed and dragged off. No mention was made of his "resisting" arrest following the tasering, other than by not getting to his feet. No flailing, kicking, etc. "So either taser him again, or hogtie him and carry him out." Or not. But even if the police could justify tasering him a second time to "spur him on," they could not justify doing it repeatedly: it wasn't working. At best. At worst, it was counterproductive. Any additional taserings at that point are pure sadism. Seven or more... as NYGBabe counted? I have never heard of any police procedure, anywhere, that says to repeatedly taser a suspect. And since when is this regarded as better than clubbing the suspect with a nightstick, anyway? Would you have said that was justified? Give him a whack or two... just to get him moving?

I don't buy the story he was going home to get his ID.

No one said he was. Just that he was leaving—for whatever reason.

I serioulsy doubt he left on their first request.

He didn't: that's why the police were summoned. However, he was in the process of leaving by the time they arrived, according to the story.

•••

And now the crux of the matter... an answer I hoped I wouldn't hear, to a question I asked in my first post:

The criminal was of Iranian family background, so I assume his skin was darkish.

<sigh> Dammit! How did I know this was the case? He looked (and was) Middle Eastern... precisely what I expected when I read the story. Precisely what I expected. Do you see it now?

No? Then let me spell it out for you. They didn't treat the student like he was a trespasser. They treated him like he was a terrorist. Which also explains the student's reaction... or were you not aware that there are still persons being held incommunicado, as "material witnesses"—not "suspects"—years after their initial arrests, as of the last time I checked? Against all principles of due process? He was terrified that he was going to be hauled off to jail, interrogated by the FBI, CIA, and lord only knows who else—in whatever uncomfortable ways the student's mind could fantasize at that moment—and never be seen again, or at least not for quite some while. He panicked—with or without justification; but panic rarely looks for justification. For that matter, most immigrants are uncomfortable having to hand their IDs over to anybody: they come from cultures where they might not get them back once they do. And most immigrants, like it or not, are afraid of the police—of our police!—and want to have nothing to do with them. Is it any wonder he tried to walk out of the situation once they showed up? Or started raising a fuss... just to make sure he didn't "vanish," that someone would notice and remember him?

I work with immigrants every day; I know their mindsets, I hear their stories... and I know that most of them are terrified of our police and government officials. This is wrong. They should never have reached that position... should never have been allowed to reach that position. Instead... we see it getting reinforced, not alleviated.

This really makes me sick. I hadn't even read that response when I started writing this: everything you see here is linear, answered in the order I ran across it as I jumped through the various posts. But I knew this was coming. I knew it! It's why I asked the question in the first place. This was not a justified police action... I doubt they've ever treated a white suspect the same way in a similar situation.

Should the student have been stopped and asked again for his ID? Maybe. Wasn't necessary, but would've been understandable. Should he have been arrested for trespassing? No—why bother? Nor have I heard that UCLA requested this, and they're the ones to make that call, not the police, not with UCLA officials present at the scene. Should everything else have happened? Absolutely not. Even if there were cause to arrest him, everything they did in going about it was wrong. And all the other "charges" applicable to this incident stemmed from the police bungling it, not from anything the student did first.

The student was completely correct in shouting about the Patriot Act. That's what this country's come to. This is not the first incident I'm aware of wherein police reacted inappropriately—and excessively: an immigrant in my own city was shot dead in such an incident—and you can bet it won't be the last. And your trying to make excuses for this will only worsen the situation.

And I am royally pissed about it.

[boston_aloha]

1st off, I respect everyone's opinion here. I just want to reinerate one thing: This whole incident could of been avoided if he had his ID, or left when 1st asked to. Screaming "don't touch me!" when a cop grabs your arm is just stupid. Especially given the situation. If you are walking down the street minding your own business that is one thing, but this kid had already created a scene with the UCLA security so to say that to cop was a bonehead move IMO. Resisting arrest is the worst thing you can do.
Maybe the cops overreacted (I don' think so IMO) but some people act as though this kid was innocent and did nothing. I don' believe that is the case.

Anyway, this is sort of getting old - because we do not have all the facts. I'll try to look for a follow up story on this. Thanks.

[Ravana]

You're right, it could have... as I have repeatedly admitted.

But that has nothing to do with the response the action engendered.

I'll be looking for follow-ups, too... hope someone can come up with something.

(And I'll be profoundly concerned if not. Here's hoping we do.)

[boston_aloha]

Ravana, I got some.... I'll start posting them.
The student was hit five times with a Taser after he refused to leave the library after being asked to do so and resisting the officers when they attempted to escort him out.
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?ID=39042

[Ellis]

1st off, I respect everyone's opinion here. I just want to reinerate one thing: This whole incident could of been avoided if he had his ID, or left when 1st asked to. Screaming "don't touch me!" when a cop grabs your arm is just stupid. Especially given the situation. If you are walking down the street minding your own business that is one thing, but this kid had already created a scene with the UCLA security so to say that to cop was a bonehead move IMO. Resisting arrest is the worst thing you can do.
Maybe the cops overreacted (I don' think so IMO) but some people act as though this kid was innocent and did nothing. I don' believe that is the case.

Anyway, this is sort of getting old - because we do not have all the facts. I'll try to look for a follow up story on this. Thanks.

I don't understand how you can say that the cops didn't overreact. Tarkus put it best, it was dumb for the kid to make a scene and not comply with the cops, but it was even worse that the police had to tazer a college kid numerous times. You don't even need the details.

If I were one of the kids there I would have rushed the cops :D I guarantee if one person did it, the rest of the kids would have. There is absolutely no way to just justify what the cops did. None at all. It just shows what happens when you put power in the wrong people's hands.

[boston_aloha]

Here is more....
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?ID=39026
He's filing a suite...
According to Yagman, Tabatabainejad was approached by Community Service Officers, but declined to present his BruinCard when asked because he believed he was the subject of racial profiling.
Now I'm really starting to think this kid's an idiot - he refused to show his ID when asked?? Who does he think he is, that he doesn't have to show ID??
The CSOs on duty announced they would be checking IDs, as is routine procedure in the library after 11 p.m., said Assistant Chief of Police Jeff Young.
Routine checks do not necessarily include a check of all students in the library.
David Remesnitsky, a 2006 UCLA alumnus who was present in the CLICC lab during the incident, said the CSO spent five to 10 minutes checking IDs, but said he was not personally asked for identification.
Looks like he was not the only one asked for ID. If they were checking ID's for 5-10 minutes.
Young, however, has said the officers could not have known at the time that Tabatabainejad was not a threat nor could they have been sure that he was not armed.
That was the argument I was making earlier, they had no idea who this kid was, only that he was creating a scene.

[boston_aloha]

I don't understand how you can say that the cops didn't overreact. Tarkus put it best, it was dumb for the kid to make a scene and not comply with the cops, but it was even worse that the police had to tazer a college kid numerous times. You don't even need the details.

If I were one of the kids there I would have rushed the cops :D I guarantee if one person did it, the rest of the kids would have. There is absolutely no way to just justify what the cops did. None at all. It just shows what happens when you put power in the wrong people's hands.
I hear ya Ellis... I just think (and this could be me being thick-headed) if the kid got up like they told him too, this incident is over and he is escorted out. He didn't want to stand up, so they tazed him. He stands up (which is not hard to do) he doesn't get tazed.
Oh, BTW - I agree with Tarkus' dumb and dumber thing.

[Ellis]

Ok, the kid was an idiot. But how does that justify what the cops did? I mean at one point you have to step and look at the what you are doing. You are torturing a kid and causing a scene just because a kid just because the kid doesn't have ID and won't listen to you. It just shows you the thought process behind people who who think that you have to destroy every threat and 'shoot now, ask questions later.'

[boston_aloha]

I know it doesn't justify the act. It would be interesting to see what their procedures are and how they justify it. Who knows, maybe it says somewhere if a suspect is not being cooperative you use force. I will agree in no way were the officers in danger once the suspect was cuffed.

[Ellis]

I hear ya Ellis... I just think (and this could be me being thick-headed) if the kid got up like they told him too, this incident is over and he is escorted out. He didn't want to stand up, so they tazed him. He stands up (which is not hard to do) he doesn't get tazed.
Oh, BTW - I agree with Tarkus' dumb and dumber thing.

I agree, if the kid would have gotten up and complied to begin with, nothing would have happened. But you have to ask yourself is it really worth it? Is it really worth tazering this kid just because he is resisting arrest? This is typical with human beings (on the cops part.) They got caught up in emotion and just go off of their emotions. Next thing you know they stop and wonder what the hell they just did.

[kirby]

The student was completely correct in shouting about the Patriot Act.

He was only correct if he was trying to make me laugh. The PATRIOT act?? Ohhhhh k.

That wierdo sounded nothing short of a psycho. His later shrieks of pain and indignance over his miserable plight were good for a few belly laughs too. I guess I could thank him for that.

I disagree with about every point you've tried to make, Rav, so I'll just leave it at that.

[Montrovant]

Ravana....not sure if this should make you feel better or not, but I believe I've seen video where police responded similarly in a similar situation to a white suspect. I really wish I remember where I saw the clip, hopefully a description will jog someone else's memory and they can provide a link....

My best reccolection :

A white woman (older woman I believe) was sitting on a chair or bench indoors, possibly even in a police station. An officer spoke with her, then proceeded to taser her. I think she fell from the seat to the floor, after which he tased her again, perhaps multiple further times. I don't remember if he had told her to get up, or they were arguing about something, or what; I apologize for the vague nature of this, it was a while ago =/

I'm certainly not trying to discount the idea that the student's skin color had something to do with the police reaction; since the 9/11 attacks a great many people seem to be very afraid of not only possible terrorist attacks but anyone of Arab descent. Minorities may shoulder the brunt of it, but the inappropriate use of force can happen to anyone.

I am still withholding judgement on this one; the video is simply not clear enough for me to know what went on in detail.

[Ellis]

He was only correct if he was trying to make me laugh. The PATRIOT act?? Ohhhhh k.

That wierdo sounded nothing short of a psycho. His later shrieks of pain and indignance over his miserable plight were good for a few belly laughs too. I guess I could thank him for that.

I disagree with about every point you've tried to make, Rav, so I'll just leave it at that.

Let's just bomb every nation that poses any kind of threat to us and torture everyone who doesn't comply by the rules. The world will be a better place.

[boston_aloha]

I agree, if the kid would have gotten up and complied to begin with, nothing would have happened. But you have to ask yourself is it really worth it? Is it really worth tazering this kid just because he is resisting arrest? This is typical with human beings (on the cops part.) They got caught up in emotion and just go off of their emotions. Next thing you know they stop and wonder what the hell they just did.
I agree Ellis. And if may make one more point - BOTH parties involved should of ask that question. The kid should of thought "Is it worth it"... he should of left when asked - stood up when told... we can go round in circles with this.

[kirby]

Let's just bomb every nation that poses any kind of threat to us and torture everyone who doesn't comply by the rules. The world will be a better place.

Probably would work out well for us in the end, but it'd be a nasty and prolonged effort to come to that climax.

I vote no.


C'mon now, Ellis, why not stay on topic. Myself, I've spoken my mind. Unless questioned, I bow out.

[boston_aloha]

Letters regarding this incident.
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?ID=39023
Taser was used as a defensive tool

I am a former full-time law enforcement officer and campus police officer.

As such, I have several points to make about the Taser incident at UCLA.

First of all, the student was unruly and uncooperative. "Get off me!" is not a response I will accept if I ask for identification on a college campus.

It shouldn't be an option to walk away from officers when asked for proof that you belong on campus.

Also, Tasers are defensive weapons, not necessarily compliance tools.

I was somewhat uncomfortable with the officers' use of the Taser. When faced with a subject who is restrained, but will not get up and come along, I usually just grab their ear and go to the car.

If that feels a little too strong at the time, I pick them up and carry them or drag them.

I don't beat them, pepper spray them, or use a Taser on them because they are not a danger to me.

However, given their presence on the scene, the officers may have decided that physically removing the student would have been dangerous to bystanders, the student or the officers themselves.

In addition, I would have told concerned bystanders to step away from what was happening or face arrest. This tends to work better than threatening them with a Taser.

Soon after retiring from my job as campus officer, a female student was abducted from a parking lot, abused, and killed within a mile of the campus.

Having identification is the first thing you must do as a student.

The second is to not question when someone asks for it.

Leon A. Richard

Farmington, Maine

[kirby]

.....the officers may have decided that physically removing the student would have been dangerous to bystanders, the student or the officers themselves.

Precisely.

So they chose the taser. It's THERE call. It's up to THEIR judgement, not some the judgement of college kids gathered around to gawk at the scene. It's also not (thankfully) up to the judgement after-the-fact armchair color analysts.

The officers were the ones in the heat of the situation and they took steps that they deemed appropriate. Those actions are fully defensible, and you're a wise man if you just simply respect that. And quite franky, you might just happen to find yourself in a situation some day when you NEED an officer to take decisive and aggressive action. No need to neuter those folks who are puttin' it on the line day in and day out.

This Tabatabainejad cat was trouble with a capital T.

[Ravana]

Don't forget the good parts, boston_aloha (you might not be; for all I know, you're posting them now).

Tabatabainejad did not leave the library immediately when he was asked to, but shortly afterward had begun to walk to the door with his backpack, witnesses and his attorney said.

Two officers approached the student and grabbed his arm as he was walking toward the door.

When they did not let go of his arm, Tabatabainejad fell limp to the floor

This confirms the earlier story—the lead-in summary paragraph about being tased "after he refused to leave the library" presents a somewhat deceptive picture.

The UCPD officers interpreted his action as resistance and a refusal to leave the premises, according to a UCPD press release, and at this point determined it was necessary to subdue him with the use of a Taser, which is classified by UCPD as a "pain compliance technique."

But this part is the best. "Necessary to subdue him"? "Subdue" a passive resister? Someone who "fell limp to the floor"? Come on.

According to UCPD policy, officers can use pain compliance techniques when doing so "appears necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose."

The policy further states that the technique should be used 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."

According to the policy, officers should also consider the nature of the offense, the individual's level of resistance, "the need for a prompt resolution," and the possibility of "other reasonable alternatives."

I have already questioned the "legitimacy" of this action; the article under discussion raises further questions. There was no "potential for injury" involved. The use of the taser—more specifically, its repeated use—mitigated against any "prompt resolution." And I think we can pretty well leave out the question of them having considered "other reasonable alternatives."

Young, however, has said the officers could not have known at the time that Tabatabainejad was not a threat nor could they have been sure that he was not armed.

Not the first time, maybe. But if they didn't frisk him when they cuffed him, they were even more incompetent than this makes them sound.

Maybe I'm a little naive where it comes to police using "pain compliance techniques," but I have the feeling these will, at the very least, come under heavy scrutiny. With what result, I can't guess... but I'm pretty sure they'll be looked at.

From boston_aloha:
Looks like he was not the only one asked for ID. If they were checking ID's for 5-10 minutes.

On the other hand, not everyone was. I'm not saying that the library monitor was himself guilty of "profiling": he/she may very well not have gotten to everyone else precisely because he/she was reporting the incident. This should be investigated, though, to make sure of this.

Look, folks, I'll say this again—for what I hope is the last time: I'm not defending the student's actions. Yes, this would've ended if he'd gotten up immediately and left. Yes, he shouldn't have resisted as he did... though I can think of reasons why he might've thought otherwise, and mentioned them earlier. Yes, he was making an unnecessary fuss... arguably even making a prize fool of himself. I don't care. Because nothing he did—as far as anything that has been reported—justified the treatment he received. To be honest, I'm not even sure I'd care, no matter what he did—because I'm not convinced that this form of treatment is "justified" under any circumstances. All I'm concerned about here is the police reaction to the situation—which was a bungle at the best, no matter what face you try to put on it. I consider it far worse than that; others of you may not... but you ought to at least be able to admit that this is not the way we want our police acting. And, yes, Montrovant, the inappropriate use of force can happen to anyone—which is why we should all be concerned. (And no, I'm not sure your recollection makes me feel any better, either. No, wait, I am: it doesn't.)

I wish this had happened to a white student... so that I wouldn't have to harbor darker suspicions. I've spent the past couple days hoping someone would tell me it had. But it didn't... and that only adds another shade of ugly to something that's already uglier than it ever ought to have been.

P.S. Thanks for your professional observations on the matter, boston_aloha, that you posted while I was still typing this up. I think they clarify what would be considered "appropriate" in most such situations, in most jurisdictions. They match what I know about police procedures in Columbus, Ohio. (And I've read their handbook on it. Too long ago to remember specifics... but I certainly would've remembered a line like "pain compliance techniques.") I can't really conceive that the situation would've presented a danger to bystanders... or that, if it did, it would not have been more appropriate to taser the student, then grab him and quick-haul him to the door while he was recovering. I'd have to see a complete visual to be certain... and to convince me otherwise.

[Ravana]

kirby:
So they chose the taser. It's THERE call.

Yes, it is. And they called it wrong. Which is all I'm saying. Why is that a problem for you? Do the police always make the right calls, in your experience?

Did you even read the rest of what boston_aloha said about such situations?

As for wanting to "neuter" the police—I want police that can control a situation, and end it as rapidly as possible. Neither of which was done here. They didn't need the friggin' taser for that... and certainly didn't need repeated applications of same. They failed—in what I would most want to see them do, were I in danger.

[boston_aloha]

Don't forget the good parts, boston_aloha (you might not be; for all I know, you're posting them now).
I was just posting the parts I wanted to comment on. Thats why I left the link.

[Ravana]

No prob, dude. I do the same. ;)

Though I do try to present evidence from all sides... where it exists.

Sorry: that sounded wrong. Not suggesting you were trying for bias; just saying I try to avoid it... as far as evidence goes. Interpretation, I feel free to be biased on....

[boston_aloha]

but you ought to at least be able to admit that this is not the way we want our police acting. And, yes, Montrovant, the inappropriate use of force can happen to anyone—which is why we should all be concerned. (And no, I'm not sure your recollection makes me feel any better, either. No, wait, I am: it doesn't.)
See I don't have a problem with it. It makes me angry that he was ordered to stand up several times and did not. Again, that's just my opinion. I'll leave it at that.

Quick story: When I was 15 I was at a party broken up by the cops and I decided to yell "f**k these pigs!" Little did I know a cop was right behind me. He tackled me, cuffed me and took me in. When we got to the station another cop recognized me from the weekend before (that cop had also broke up a party and I was wising off to him infront of other kids, but he let me go). Anyway, he noticed me and the other cops told them I called them pigs. He then gave me about 3 open hand punches to the face while I was cuffed. The Sergeant oredered him to stop when he saw this. That led to a couple bruises on my face. When I was released to my parents I told them about it. My mom was pissed (as mom's always are) but my dad told me I should of shut my mouth and not of been drinking in the 1st place. I was not arrested BTW, they released me to my parents. For years I thought that cop was a dick. But after I joined the military and finally respected authority, I changed my mind. I was the dick, for being in the wrong and being a punk. These guys put their life on the line and here I am calling them pigs because I wanted to drink (under age!!).
I know this is different than being tased for lack of ID, but I just wanted you to understand why I don't have a problem with it, and why it angered me that he did not follow orders when he was asked to leave, and then asked to stand up. Thanks.

[boston_aloha]

No prob, dude. I do the same. ;)

Though I do try to present evidence from all sides... where it exists.

Sorry: that sounded wrong. Not suggesting you were trying for bias; just saying I try to avoid it... as far as evidence goes. Interpretation, I feel free to be biased on....

No thats cool... I was leaving that for you to post and debate me.

[Jaguar Rick]

I don't think there is any justification for the use of the tazers by these officers. Did he have a weapon? Couldn't they escort him out in handcuffs? Totally unnecessary!

[Ravana]

For years I thought that cop was a dick. But after I joined the military and finally respected authority, I changed my mind. I was the dick, for being in the wrong and being a punk.

You're right, you were.

But you were also right the first time.

[boston_aloha]

So I'm always right? I'm a genious!!! :lol:

[Peter North]

How tall was the offender? Was he slight of build, or was he a big dude? I'd like to know his physical measurements. Thanks.