I'm sorry, but "paid administrative leave" will not cut it. LT PIKE NEEDS TO BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED

[LaydeeBug]

RIGHT FUCKING NOW.

This is like Joe Pa announcing his retirement. Oh NO! You don't get to announce an EFFING thing. You get to be held accountable. It *might* be time for an EASY ACTIVIST ALERT.

Just sayin'...

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. "But, Mein Herr, I vas only following Orders!"

[LaydeeBug]

4. That works about as well as the Nuremburg defense. nt

I am sure I spelled Nurembourg incorrectly, but i am too fucking pissed off to google it. Sue me :D

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. I sure hope so.

Nuremberg.

Fascinating stuff. I once knew an investigator for them. He taught them poker, they improved his chess. He hated the idea of Gitmo and water boarding. He claimed, before he died, that befriending them and treating them with politeness, he could get far more accurate, serious, helpful information. He died about 3 yrs ago.

None of the people he investigated were put to death, but a couple spent many years in prison. One fear that he (and his fellow investigators) had was that their work would be viewed as retribution, not a search for justice. They discussed that issue many times, and they did their best to keep the investigation professional. Apparently, there was a lot of pressure from Washington pols. They ignored it to the best of their ability.

[Critters2]

21. Actually, that IS the Nuremberg Defense. Just sayin'. nt

[L. Coyote]

2. Pike's Last Pepper Spray

[EFerrari]

3. You should plug into the ones ongoing. I think Occupy_Police

and OccupyMarines have one on their twitter timeline.

[LaydeeBug]

5. "have one what"? i am not sure what you are referring to nt

[EFerrari]

16. An Easy Activist Alert. nt

[jberryhill]

7. The "instance justice" mindset is what produces people like him

[LaydeeBug]

17. and if I were calling for him to be summarily pepper sprayed, MAYBE you would have a point, but...

criminals who participate in criminal behavior need to be held to the rule of law. Thanks. :hi:

[jberryhill]

19. Yes,

...and eventually he may be indicted, and it is pretty much a certainty that there is going to be a major payout by UC.

But that is not stuff that happens with the speed of internet impulsiveness.

[Bjorn Against]

71. If he were an ordinary citizen however he would have be sitting in jail right now

No one would be labeling the speed of his arrest "internet impulsiveness", he would be quickly hauled off to jail and no one would be asking us to wait for the investigation. Cops seem to operate under a different set of laws than the rest of us, I will not be patient and wait for their "internal investigation" whitewash, I want them to take action against him NOW just as they would with any ordinary citizen who violently attacked peaceful people like he did.

[kestrel91316]

8. Cops NEVER get criminally charged unless there's a dead body.....

and not usually then, either.

[Uncle Joe]

9. Self delete due to technical error. n/t

[Logical]

10. NOTHING will happen to this POS. Maybe lose a weeks vacation. Cops protect Cops.

[LaydeeBug]

18. Sad, but true. nt

[Uncle Joe]

11. I agree he should be charged, there was simply no excuse for his behavior and the only

thing Pike did for the police force was to further damage its' image, the same can be said for the other police abusers.

Simply put, some people should not have the power of the badge and gun, it's too much for them to handle and they're a danger to society on several levels.

Thanks for the thread, LaydeeBug.

[SidDithers]

12. Should he be investigated first, or should they just go straight to sentencing?...nt

Sid

[Aerows]

14. How much investigation is really necessary?

It's not like is isn't out there for everyone to see. Does he deserve a fair trial? Sure. But let's not pretend that there is some extended investigation necessary. Pretty much the entire world witnessed him pepper spraying seated, cowering students on their own college campus. They can't even do that to prison inmates.

[treestar]

24. How many police departments have you run?

It's too easy to determine what should be done on a job we don't hold.

[Aerows]

26. I don't think I need to run a police department

To note when a crime is being committed. Pepper spraying cowering people speaks for itself.

[Rex]

36. Well you know some people don't like to believe their lying eyes

when it involves a PIGGY. Jus sayin...video evidence of violating his oath? Meh...we should investigate! Give him some additional time off to get his story straight.

[Rex]

34. Really? Why would you need to run a police department to know that

the PIG violated his oath? Just love PIGS huh? :eyes:

[WinkyDink]

74. Yes, watching a cop pepper-spraying point-blank at sitting people is DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT.

[LaydeeBug]

20. I didn't call for sentencing, I called for an arrest, and there damn well should be one

one. Pesky rule of law and all.

[treestar]

25. The investigation is part of that pesky rule

There a entire sets of rules and procedures. It always takes longer than people want. And that's probably a good thing.

[Aerows]

27. If the shoe was on the other foot

And it was a civilian that did this to a police officer, there would be no question that the civilian would go directly to jail.

Instead, this guy is on a paid vacation. That's infuriating, considering what he did - and it's not like there is even the slightest question that he did it.

[Supply Side Jesus]

32. Neither, he did it by the book.....believe it or not

they should have left the protestors alone. But when a person does not follow a lawful order, which is disputed obviously, the first step on the use of force continuum is chemical agent. Going hands on is much more dangerous for both parties.

I don't agree with what happened. But those cops were given orders and they did it by the book. The UoF continuum is used nation wide and is upheld by the courts. Pike will not loose his job or a penny of pay. but, those who gave the order, need to be held to the fire...

[Rex]

37. Did it by the book? What book?

I'd love to see the steps involved at the point Mr. Piggy walked around the people and started pepper spraying them in a line. I'm sure no one can produce any evidence to prove what you just posted, but it does make some here feel better about their love for authority.

[Supply Side Jesus]

38. i just stated what the book was, pay attention to what you read instead of preparing for Grandstand

calm down and breath for a second, but I shouldn't expect it from some on here, knee jerk hysterics passes for thoughtful discussion on here.

It's called "The Use of Force Continuum"

but since you are incapable of a simple google, I'll post the first link for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum

as stated once again, and i'll even caps it for you in hopes it will sink through you skull....

THE DEMONSTRATORS SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT ALONE. ADMIN GAVE THE ORDER TO BREAK IT UP, ADMIN SHOULD BE HELD TO THE FIRE....


ON EDIT:

on many UoFC pepper spray is used before putting hands on

[Rex]

43. He passed a class to use tear gas and failed to use it in a proper setting.

Sorry if you don't care about that detail. I see many grasping at straws here trying to justify the action, when you cannot.

Try again.

[Supply Side Jesus]

46. Pepper spray is not tear gas, and I am not suprised you choose to lie about my position

chemical agent comes before putting hands on, that's the book, and the general accepted practice among LEO agencies. I stated he would not loose his job or a penny of pay because he did what he was trained to do. but by all means, but you choose to fail to see that. He acted within policy and established court precedents,that's why nothing will happen to him. You are disingenuous about my statements making you no better than those who rage against in your virtual little world. act like the tough guy on the internet when in reality you don't know shit about LEO, what they're training, is and how that equates to the REAL world.

[Rex]

58. Lie? Bullshit I don't care about your position, you have no idea what

you are talking about! You are so far in denial that it is pointless to try and make you see the side of reason. You obviously don't know shit about cops, but keep it up. :eyes:

[metalbot]

40. The CA penal code pretty much supports pepper spraying non-compliant people

FWIW, the last sentence of your post is the equivalent to "If you don't support invading Iraq, you must love Saddam Hussein."

It's made pretty clear in the CA penal code when police officers are allowed to use force to arrest someone. There's an explicit portion of penal code that says officers are allowed to use pepper spray (the definitions in the code equate pepper spray and tear gas, and tear gas is the term used):

CA Penal Code Section 12403 (no subsection):

Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any person who is a
peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2, from purchasing, possessing, transporting,
or using any tear gas or tear gas weapon if the person has
satisfactorily completed a course of instruction approved by the
Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training in the use of tear
gas.

So clearly, if the police officer is allowed to use force, he's allowed to use pepper spray.

That begs the question of "when is a police officer allowed to use force?" Well, if someone is resisting arrest, certainly you wouldn't argue that no force is allowed. Were the protesters resisting arrest? Probably:

California Penal Code 148(a)(1) PC -- Resisting arrest. ("(a)(1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.")

Clasping hands together to resist being removed is by definition resisting arrest.

While we'd have to see UC Davis's policy manual for this, I'd be willing to bet that pepper spray is the first force escalation, since the alternative is fists, clubs, tazers, and firearms.

While the officer exercised bad judgement, there's nothing that he did that was criminal. I'm not sure what CA law people here think the officer was breaking...

[Rex]

42. He can use the tear gas if he passes a course, but that doesn't

tell us if he had a justifiable reason to use it. Clearly he is allowed to use force...just like all cops, so you have not shown any evidence that he was in the right. Just that he took a class and now can use it...does not mean he had the RIGHT to. Nothing in your post proves that point, you just posted something that has nothing to do with what he did.

Again, if anyone can show evidence that he was in the right, I'd love to see it.

[metalbot]

44. Ok. Let's try again.

You're agreeing that he is allowed to use force, you agree that pepper spray is "force", but argue that he didn't have the right to use it? I'm not arguing that what he did was the "right" thing to do, I'm arguing that it was legal, and therefor he had the "right" to use it (whether or not that choice was operationally or morally correct).

My argument is pretty straightforward:

1. Were the protesters resisting arrest?

Yes, that's pretty clear, according to the CA penal code (as posted above).

2, Can an officer use force to make an arrest?

Yes, that's also very clear. Here's a nice quote from the CA bar association:

"Resisting an arrest or detention is a crime. If you resist arrest, you can be charged with a misdemeanor or felony in addition to the crime for which you are being arrested. If you resist, an officer can use force to overcome your resistance or prevent your escape. The officer can even use deadly force if it appears that you will use force to cause serious injury."

3. What constitutes "force", under CA law?

Anything from beating you with a truncheon, tazering you, wrestling you to the ground while punching you, or pepper spraying you. All are legal to the extent that they are used for ensuring compliance. Once a suspect is complying, use of force has to stop. Is this the part you are stuck on, that while pepper spray and wrestling a student are both force, that there are supposed to be different legal standards for when they are used? There's no difference from a legal perspective. The only other type of force defined under CA law is "deadly force", and pepper spray is not considered deadly force under CA law.


I think if you're going to assert that the officer was in the wrong, the onus should be on you to tell us what law you think he broke. Assault? Police officers are explicitly exempted from assault charges when using force to make an arrest. You're essentially asking for proof of innocence, whereas our judicial systems generally work the other way and look for evidence of guilt. This officer isn't going to get charged with anything. It's possible that he's violated some departmental policy and will get fired, but I doubt it.

[Supply Side Jesus]

47. +1

why argue, he chooses to be obstinate

Rex really has no clue what he is talking about. way over his head.

very good response

[Rex]

57. Oh please, I know exactly what I am talking about.

And when he gets fired I will laugh out loud at you for your ignorance.

[LaydeeBug]

80. How were they NON COMPLIANT WHEN THEY ARE KNEELING AND HANDCUFFED??? Please. nt

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Supply Side Jesus]

13. Pike the UC-Davis pepper spray cop?

[LaydeeBug]

22. yup

[Octafish]

15. And his Bosses.

All the way up the line.

[LaydeeBug]

23. yup. nt

[MH1]

28. I was going to rec, but this is NOTHING like the JoePa situation

There is only the evidence of a demonstrated coward and liar against Paterno. For Lt. Pike there is video evidence.

I agree, Pike should be CRIMINALLY CHARGED. (but not harassed by internet vigilantes posting his personal address and phone #, as has been done here multiple times. There is a crucial difference.)

As for JoePa, let the investigation find out if he should be charged criminally. Otherwise roasting him on the word of McQueary is just more vigilantism. (But mostly I wish you hadn't brought him into the discussion of Pike. Not even apples and oranges. Fish and mp3's.)

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Logical]

30. "harassed" meaning what? Insulted? Woken up?

[LaydeeBug]

81. Um...yes it is. nt

[ladjf]

31. If torture in the U.S. is illegal then the officer is a criminal. nt

[Rex]

33. PIGS get the same protection as real cops.

Shame really, he deserves to be living in a gutter somewhere.

[TorchTheWitch]

39. he's on administrative leave while the investigation commences

Which is standard. That's the nice thing about being in a union - you don't get punished until after the investigation. Whatever that punishment turns out to be (if there is any) is anyone's guess. It's probably likely that nothing much will happen, but who knows. It will depend on how the university feels about it since it's going to be the university's decision concerning what (if any) punishment he gets. If after the investigation he doesn't get appropriate punishment, blame the university as THEY are the one that will be making the decision... just as it is always the local government that controls its police department decides these things so too do the universities that control their own police department. And as usual, they'll decide what to do according to what they think is most politically expedient. In this case, I can see it going either way... punish him severely to please an angry public or punish him not at all to try to make it appear that they have more control of their police officers than they do and they're admins aren't as incompetent as they are.

One encouraging thing is that through the investigation it was discovered that another officer was also involved and he is also now in the same boat as Pike. They could have easily disregarded the second officer if they wanted to since nobody seemed to know of his involvement. This seems to indicate they're doing a thorough job of investigating the circumstances.

Interesting that here the blame never goes higher than the police department as if they're some totally free entity that makes its own decisions and does whatever it wants. We don't do that with the military though since for some reason here it is recognized that the military is under the control of the government who makes the ultimate decisions. Strange that it isn't recognized here that it's the same for the police departments.

[JoeyT]

45. Police aren't the same as the military.

The police can walk away with no punishment. The military members cannot. That's the difference.

And we do blame military members when they do things. I don't recall anyone at the cabinet level being charged when the photos of torture came out. No one but the guys that were collecting fingers were charged for all the stuff they did.

The nice thing about being in the police union is they'll close ranks and nothing will happen to him at all. If he actually does get fired, he'll have another job waiting for him in another city.

[TorchTheWitch]

70. they are the same in that we blame the decision makers in the military

but not so here with the police. That's the only comparison I made. And it's true.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Two things

1.- As much as I hate it, they NEED to do the investigation and internal affairs and all that.

2.- This is a major crack.

No, none of his juniors do that... and they did not suspend the wrong person.

This is an important crack.

[Supply Side Jesus]

49. Nadin, I love you and respect you very much

but what happened was within the scope of allowed force to the resistance they applied.

you know I strongly support OWS and have coordinated my local OWS and local Police to avoid situations like this.

I believe Admin really fucked up by trying to break up a peaceful demonstration. The cops received there orders and they did it text book. When they refused to leave, chemical agent was applied. When they continued to refuse the Cops went hands on. That was a proper use of force as adopted by many agencies.

This will only help the movement, it is a big crack. The Admin needs to held accountable, they are the ones pulling the strings. I can guarantee the cops would be happy just to leave the demonstrators alone. The cop will keep his job and not loose penny of pay.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. AIMING pepper spray it's well beyond lawful orders

and that is for starters. No, you do NOT aim that at the face, but chest, That is in the use of that crap manuals.

Secondly, to the level of threat posed by the students, this was an incredible abuse of force. There was no threat to the cops by kids sitting down and locking arms...


That said, I agree, we should not be looking at the puppets, in this case, but the puppeteers.

[Rex]

60. Oh I dunno, fire a few puppets and the other lapdogs might

stop dancing for their masters.

Important crack indeed.

[GliderGuider]

72. Headwaters v. Humboldt County disagrees with you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2355313&mesg_id=2358099

The rules on excessive force still apply.

[Rex]

59. True.

As is witnessed by the pearl clutchers here in this thread. The officer was not clearing an obstruction, just acting out like a fucking bully that has no control over the situation.

He will get fired.

[LanternWaste]

48. I knew there would be a least one poster rationalizing the cop's actions

I knew there would be a least one poster rationalizing the cop's actions, but I didn't think there would be more...

[Supply Side Jesus]

50. no one is rationalizing

we are explaining how the courts will look at what happened. While policy changes may occur at UC-Davis, nothing will happen to the cop.

we can lie and just nod our heads and repeat "fuckin pigs" like good little soldiers or we can give a perspective which will more than likely prevail. And then when nothing happens to the cop, we can repeat "fuckin pigs." Is that what you want?

[LanternWaste]

51. Wasn't referring to that side-bar...

Wasn't referring to that side-bar, thanksverymuch.

Whatever a "good little solider is", bless your heart... :shrug:

[Supply Side Jesus]

52. You know what a "good little solider" is

and I apologize, if I ASSUMEd you were referring to a rather large sub-thread in this thread.

[LanternWaste]

53. No... I don't.

No... I really don't. :shrug:

(Additionally, I really don't care...)

[Supply Side Jesus]

54. Ignorance is a virtue....

good for you

[Fire Walk With Me]

56. Oh dear, here is the California ruling against the use of pepper-spray upon the non-violent:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1332957.html

HEADWATERS FOREST DEFENSE v. COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT

Nine environmental activists and an environmental group brought this action, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the County of Humboldt, the Humboldt County Sheriff's Department, Eureka City and its police department, and several individual officers, alleging that the officers' use of pepper spray on the activists' eyes and faces during three peaceful protests constituted an excessive use of force in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.   We previously issued an opinion, which is reported at 240 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir.2001), in which we reversed the district court's decision to grant summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds to Humboldt County Sheriff Dennis Lewis (“Lewis”) and Chief Deputy Sheriff Gary Philip (“Philip”), the defendants who initially authorized the use of the pepper spray on the nonviolent protestors. We also reversed the district court's decision to enter judgment in favor of Humboldt County, the City of Eureka, and their respective police departments following trial and a hung jury.


Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the protestors, we conclude that Philip and Lewis are not entitled to qualified immunity because the use of pepper spray on the protestors' eyes and faces was plainly in excess of the force necessary under the circumstances, and no reasonable officer could have concluded otherwise.

-------

Thank you Anonymous for this juicy tidbit.

[Aerows]

61. Very nice summation there

It's no doubt that this was excessive force. None at all. They can't even do this to incarcerated criminals, why do they think they have the right to do it to peacefully protesting college students on their own college campus.

[TorchTheWitch]

73. that's a precedent not the law

As we all know, in specific cases the law is applied according to the unique circumstances of each case and how it is applied can vary from judge to judge. There will be legal precedent for similar cases as the one in question both for and against as there always is. This particular ruling was arrived at because of the unique circumstances in this particular case, and without knowing what they are, we can't apply this ruling to the case in question... "Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the protesters, we conclude that Philip and Lewis are not entitled to qualified immunity because the use of pepper spray on the protesters' eyes and faces was plainly in excess of the force necessary under the circumstances, and no reasonable officer could have concluded otherwise." You could probably just have easily found a legal precedent in a similar case that by its unique circumstances ruled in favor of the police.

In other words, a legal precedent here doesn't really mean jack shit especially if we don't know what the unique circumstances of the cited cases are and even then it's still uncertain depending on the judge.

All we can go by is what the actual law says. From the information others have cited here it appears that pepper spray is legal to use against protesters who are resisting arrest. I don't know if it also applies to protesters that are resisting an order to disperse or whether or not they were ever ordered to disperse or if ordered to disperse and they resisted whether or not the police intended to arrest them. None of this can be gleaned from the video. These basic facts can mean a huge difference as to whether the police acted lawfully or not. If they didn't give any order to disperse before protesters were pepper sprayed, that would be unlawful. Technically, I suppose it could also be unlawful for them to order the protesters to disperse if there is no legal reason to order them to disperse (and there was no legal reason since they were peacefully exercising their 1st Amendment rights) and them not following an unlawful order. How it all breaks down as to who is legally responsible for what, I'm not certain of. However, the ultimate responsibility lies with the person at the top of the chain that gave the order.

The larger point here is that THEY SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO DISPERSE in the first place. THAT order came from the the school (presumably the chancellor). This is why the ultimate responsibility for the protesters being ordered to disperse and everything that came afterward is that of the school (presumably the chancellor). As I understand it, it was the chancellor that gave the order to police and not only that the protesters be unlawfully dispersed she knew about the protest beforehand and either ok'd it or didn't say anything to anyone about her intent to have the police come in to disperse them. Essentially, she set the students up to be arrested and/or physically harmed by the police unlawfully. This would be exactly why there are so many calls for her head and why she should not even be given the opportunity to resign but should be fired.

Again, it is the SCHOOL (presumably the chancellor) who is deserving of the bulk of the outrage here. The police officers who employed pepper spray on the students may very well have done so lawfully though it was certainly unnecessary and immoral, but it is the SCHOOL (presumably the chancellor) who purposely set up the students to be arrested and/or physically harmed by the police for lawfully exercising their 1st Amendment rights.

We really need to stop concentrating the outrage solely on the police when it is the higher-ups in the schools and local governments that are giving them the orders that are most deserving of the outrage.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

62. if he is part of a union...

then there may be a required 'investigation' even if it is a formality. he could well be fired...but they may HAVE to go via a certain route to get there...

sP

[katty]

63. this is a slap on the wrist-it's nothing-they should be charged

with deliberate assault on a peaceful protest.

[rdking647]

64. put him in jail in teh general pop

a few days of getting the shit beat out of him will serve as a great deterent to cops in the future

[KamaAina]

65. BART pig Johannes Mehserle murdered Oscar Grant in cold blood

and was only charged with second-degree murder and ultimately convicted of involuntary manslaughter. And that was progress!

Here, with no one dead? Don't hold your breath. :eyes:

[pipi_k]

66. So, the perspective from a retired cop...

Namely, Mr Pipi, who was a cop for 18 years before getting injured on the job.

Every time that pepper spray incident shows up on the news, here is what he says....

Bastards!!!! FIRE THEM!!!!



just wanted people to know that there are some good cops (and retired cops) in the world.

:)

[Lex]

67. I would like to think there are more cops like your Mr. Pipi.

I have lost all faith that police officers really are there to protect us.

[pipi_k]

77. There are...

at least, the ones I know personally.

One of my cousins was a cop too, and also had to retire due to an injury. He's a real nice guy.

Doesn't seem fair, does it, that the good ones can't continue...

[Aerows]

68. I don't blame him

I'd be extremely offended by people sullying my profession, as well.

[pipi_k]

78. Oh, it's not just the sullying...

He really believes in not abusing power.

In 18 years on the force, he never used his weapon, and he never hurt another human being, even though I'm sure he would have liked to bash some noses.

Oh, and we're a strange mix here...he's somewhat more conservative than I am, but he completely and totally agrees with whatever methods the OWS protesters employ. In fact, if not for his age and a couple of health problems, he would probably be right there protesting as well.

:)

[HCE SuiGeneris]

69. Yes, he does. The practice of fumigating does NOT extend to people.

The cavalier attitude of this f'n prick needs swift justice. No more treating citizens like insects, bugs, or fresh sprung weed.

WE are the damn people you are PAID to "protect and serve".

[barbtries]

75. on torture charges.

arrested, jailed, prosecuted, and imprisoned. as if it would ever happen.

[firehorse]

76. Why can't police disinguish police protesting and enemy combatants

Are they brainwashed to dehumanize or are they just lazy and its easier to pepper spray than to do actual police work.

[CanonRay]

79. If that wasn't a criminal assault, then I don't know what would be.

If I'd been sprayed,I'd be at the DA's office,demanding he be charged with assault.

[JoePhilly]

82. Fox News just gave him a show with Megan Kelly ... here is the announcement.

[leftyohiolib]

83. paid leave is also called vacation