UCLA campus police torture student, in the library

[Evo]

WOW! All you folks think it isn't excessive force to repeatedly zap the dude AFTER he's been handcuffed?

I saw him handcuffed at the end, show me where he was zapped after being handcuffed. I watched the video.

 

[Gokul43201]

They're a big step ahead of all those people who believe a stun gun immobilizes the victim even before it is even used.

But that's just a strawman. The question is whether it was really necessary to repeatedly zap the student after he was handcuffed?

And do you really think they were following some rule that required cops who have already handcuffed a student to then "encourage" him to walk out on his own steam?

 

[Gokul43201]

I saw him handcuffed at the end, show me where he was zapped after being handcuffed. I watched the video.

Clearly visible right in the middle - 3:14

 

[chroot]

I saw him handcuffed at the end, show me where he was zapped after being handcuffed. I watched the video.

Yeah, I didn't see any handcuffed zapping either. I actually thought the police were trying to make this "easy" on him by just motivating him to get up and leave on his own two feet. A stun gun on a low setting is actually an ideal tool for this kind of, ahem, motivation.

After it was apparent, two shocks later, that he wasn't interested in doing either, they should have just cuffed him and done it the traditional way.

- Warren

 

[russ_watters]

The more I think about it -- especially after watching the video again -- the more I suspect this person planned this "civil disobedience" to make the greatest possible ordeal. I don't know whether or not it was premeditated, planned weeks in advance, but I think that, once the situation got going, he decided to make a political statement instead of just accepting that he broke and rule and needed to leave. He stretched out his own removal as long as he could, on purpose.

- Warren

That occurred to me as well. It is tough to prove whether or not it was a premeditated stunt, but it seems from the video like once it got going he decided to use it to its fullest potential.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

I don't think anyone is arguing the use of the stun gun in the first place.

So far half the people are talking about the multiple uses vs just dragging him out. And how that was bad. And the other people disagreeing with those people are talking about the initial use. Everyone is arguing about different things.

As for the kid "inciting resistance" that is plain bull****, the police were doing that themselfs. They should use some initiative next time and drag him out nicely.

Also, how does the police remaining calm pertain to whether what they did was correct or not?

 

[0rthodontist]

It doesn't matter how many "warnings" a police officer gives to an unarmed man, if all the man is doing is protesting and making a scene. The guy acted like a fool and was clearly trying to emotionally incite the police officers. That does not justify the officers retaliating with a stun baton. The student presented a difficult, challenging, but nonviolent situation and there was no reason to do anything but handcuff him and carry him out.

 

[twisting_edge]

And do you really think they were following some rule that required cops who have already handcuffed a student to then "encourage" him to walk out on his own steam?

I've had up-front and very personal interactions of almost precisely this nature with a wider variety of law-enforcement services than I'd care to admit. The bizarre policy constraints they follow in unusual situations are very real.

I believe a student that does not immediately leave when threatened with a stun gun by a police officer can safely be categorized as "unusual". A student who does so repeatedly would be even more rare.

 

[russ_watters]

The school is saying what the lawyers told them to say.

Even if they didn't follow the guidelines, they would just say they did.

Did you watch the video? You don't need to take anyone's word for it except his!:

cops: get up!
him: f-off!

Seems pretty straightforward to me...

Stunning him won't unlimp him.

The point isn't to unlimp him, the point is to coerce him into doing what they told him to. The fact that it didn't shows just how motivated he was to resist.

 

[russ_watters]

WOW! All you folks think it isn't excessive force to repeatedly zap the dude AFTER he's been handcuffed?

Watch the video. Clearly, handcuffing a person alone does not necessarily end resistance.

 

[russ_watters]

I rather not endure that moment of pain, and I'm sure you wouldn't either along with many others.

You make it sound like its nothing.

Odds are pretty good that physically dragging him out of the building would have caused physical injury. Zapping him coerce him to walk out under his own power causes no actual injury whatsoever. It's the same reason your mother spanks you on the ass - it hurts, but causes no injury whatsoever. Yeah - no injury whatsoever = "nothing".

 

[Gokul43201]

I believe a student that does not immediately leave when threatened with a stun gun by a police officer can safely be categorized as "unusual". A student who does so repeatedly would be even more rare.

The dude was handcuffed for crying out loud. The next step is to to grab his two arms and march him out.

Instead, you handcuff him...and then ask him to leave the building? And then do what? Find his way to the neighborhood blacksmith and get the cuffs snapped off?

 

[twisting_edge]

It doesn't matter how many "warnings" a police officer gives to an unarmed man, if all the man is doing is protesting and making a scene.

Care to tell that to the students who were presumably there to study?

Tell me, precisely how long is "long enough"? Should the police department send a six man delegation to argue with him all night long if he continues to refuse to leave the building? All the fellow has done is protest and make a scene after all.

Oh, I forgot: he was also trespassing. Oops. My bad.

 

[Evo]

Clearly visible right in the middle - 3:14

You're wrong. Go back and look at it again. They picked him up and carried him downstairs. No taser. He was just yelling his head off the whole time. Watch it, repeatedly. NO TASER. Not once after he was handcuffed.

 

[0rthodontist]

cops: get up!
him: f-off!

Seems pretty straightforward to me...

So? If a man is so stupid he tells an armed police officer to f-off, what does that mean for the physical situation that the police officer must deal with? Nothing. It just tells them that the student does not want to move on his own, so he must be handcuffed and carried out. It is not a physical threat. Police officers should never "retaliate" with physical force against a purely verbal assault.

 

[twisting_edge]

The dude was handcuffed for crying out loud. The next step is to to grab his two arms and march him out.

He was not handcuffed when they were asking him to leave.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along? No policeman would ask someone to leave after handcuffing them.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Care to tell that to the students who were presumably there to study?

Tell me, precisely how long is "long enough"? Should the police department send a six man delegation to argue with him all night long if he continues to refuse to leave the building? All the fellow has done is protest and make a scene after all.

Oh, I forgot: he was also trespassing. Oops. My bad.

Conveniently ignore Orthodontist's last sentence.Edit: Put in the quote.

 

[russ_watters]

It doesn't matter how many "warnings" a police officer gives to an unarmed man, if all the man is doing is protesting and making a scene. The guy acted like a fool and was clearly trying to emotionally incite the police officers. That does not justify the officers retaliating with a stun baton. The student presented a difficult, challenging, but nonviolent situation and there was no reason to do anything but handcuff him and carry him out.

Yeah, as a matter of fact, it does. Police have the responsibility to use force to arrest a person if necessary. That includes painful coercion. You can't just allow someone to be resist - even if they are resisting while in handcuffs.

Again, watch the video - the other people around were verbally combative. If I had been one of those cops, I'd have been nervous that the guy might be able to incite the crowd into physically confronting the police. He needed to be forceably removed from the area as fast as possible.

 

[russ_watters]

So? If a man is so stupid he tells an armed police officer to f-off, what does that mean for the physical situation that the police officer must deal with? Nothing. It just tells them that the student does not want to move on his own, so he must be handcuffed and carried out. It is not a physical threat. Police officers should never "retaliate" with physical force against a purely verbal assault.

Since he was not acting as ordered, it wasn't a purely verbal assault, was it? That is physical resistance. That just verbalizes it: it translates into 'I am physically resisting you'.

And what of the other people in the area? They were getting rowdy as well.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

The other people were getting rowdy because they perceived the police's actions as being outside reasonable force.

 

[Evo]

Since he was not acting as ordered, it wasn't a purely verbal assault, was it? That is physical resistance. That just verbalizes it: it translates into 'I am physically resisting you'.And what of the other people in the area? They were getting rowdy as well.

Also, the shock was the most non-physical, non-harmful form of restraint possible. I guess Orthodontist, you'd prefer that they kick his ribs in instead?

 

[twisting_edge]

Conveniently ignore Orthodontist's last sentence.

Because that last sentence is just an emotional appeal stating an opinion. The first sentence was something that could more easily be refuted.

I notice you "conveniently failed" to address my last sentence, stating the fact the guy was not merely shouting and making a scene, but was in fact trespassing.

You indict yourself. Good shot.

 

[Gokul43201]

He was not handcuffed when they were asking him to leave.

Do you just make this stuff up as you go along? No policeman would ask someone to leave after handcuffing them.

Okay, no need to get confrontational. If I started it, I apologize - I was just reacting from disbelief, and I was never attacking you personally.

I was not referring to the initial summons to leave but the repeated subsequent requests to "stand up" (and the zappings that accompanied the refusal). Why was that necessary? Why do you insist on having a person that you've already handcuffed have to stand up on his own?

I don't disagree that there's likely to be all kinds of obscure rules. But once a guy is handcuffed...?

 

[0rthodontist]

Yeah, as a matter of fact, it does. Police have the responsibility to use force to arrest a person if necessary. That includes painful coercion. You can't just allow someone to be resist - even if they are resisting while in handcuffs.

You can't carry them out the door, if you are a group of several police officers? I agree that police have the responsibility to use force, but they have the equally important responsibility not to use excessive force.

Again, watch the video - the other people around were verbally combative. If I had been one of those cops, I'd have been nervous that the guy might be able to incite the crowd into physically confronting the police. He needed to be forceably removed from the area as fast as possible.

Shocking the student in front of those gathered can only have made the crowd situation worse, and I think the officers may have been lucky that the crowd stood back as it did. The best thing is to quickly carry the student out, not leave him in the same spot as the crowd continues to grow, shocking him over and over while probably a hundred students look on.

 

[Evo]

The other people were getting rowdy because they perceived the police's actions as being outside reasonable force.

And being young, naive and having no clue as to what is happening, I guess that means something?

 

[Evo]

You can't carry them out the door, if you are a group of several police officers? I agree that police have the responsibility to use force, but they have the equally important responsibility not to use excessive force.

Shocking the student in front of those gathered can only have made the crowd situation worse, and I think the officers may have been lucky that the crowd stood back as it did. The best thing is to quickly carry the student out, not leave him in the same spot as the crowd continues to grow, shocking him over and over while probably a hundred students look on.

You don't know what the policy is, do you? Perhaps their orders are not to create a situation where the kid stands criminal charges. Just get him out. Do not involve real law officers and real prosecution. Ever think of that?

 

[0rthodontist]

Also, the shock was the most non-physical, non-harmful form of restraint possible. I guess Orthodontist, you'd prefer that they kick his ribs in instead?

The kid was unarmed. The shock was unnecessary--the most non-physical, non-harmful form of restraint was just to grab his hands and force him into a pair of handcuffs, then grab his arms and/or torso and drag him out the door. There were two or three trained police officers there. The only danger they were in was from the crowd, and shocking the student instead of dragging him out quickly only made the crowd situation worse.

 

[russ_watters]

You can't carry them out the door, if you are a group of several police officers? I agree that police have the responsibility to use force, but they have the equally important responsibility not to use excessive force.

I've never been picked up that way, but I suspect that picking someone up by their bicepts when their hands are handcuffed behind them would be extremely painful and perhaps cause damage to the shoulder.

You know, they did use a very similar technique as torture in Vietnam, right? Guys like John McCain never regained full use of their arms because of it.

 

[Gokul43201]

You're wrong. Go back and look at it again. They picked him up and carried him downstairs. No taser. He was just yelling his head off the whole time. Watch it, repeatedly. NO TASER. Not once after he was handcuffed.

Evo...did you watch the bit around 3:14?

The guy is being zapped. You hear a sharp scream and his legs go flying up from under him. At the same instant, you see both his hands clearly cuffed behind his back. He IS being tazed after he was cuffed.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

And being young, naive and having no clue as to what is happening, I guess that means something?

I didn't say they were right. I said that the reason they were rowdy wasn't because the boy was inciting them, the police's actions were inciting them.
@Twisting

I'll elaborate.

Care to tell that to the students who were presumably there to study?

Tell me, precisely how long is "long enough"? Should the police department send a six man delegation to argue with him all night long if he continues to refuse to leave the building? All the fellow has done is protest and make a scene after all.

Oh, I forgot: he was also trespassing. Oops. My bad.

The student presented a difficult, challenging, but nonviolent situation and there was no reason to do anything but handcuff him and carry him out.

Who said they should just sit there and argue with him? Orthodontist said they should've carried him out. However you plainly ignore that and then show that his suggestion not to use stun batons is absurd by portraying an unlikely stupid and counter-productive scenario which fits not using a baton. Classic straw-man argument.

Edit: Also I'd like to note I didn't ignore your last sentence, I'm just not addressing either side of the argument, just the fact you ignored half of Orthodontist's argument.

 

[twisting_edge]

The other people were getting rowdy because they perceived the police's actions as being outside reasonable force.

And the shouting about the Patriot Act had nothing whatsoever to do with that, did it? In fact, the shouting of "get your hands off me!" that starts the video had nothing to do with it? All that yelling and screaming had nothing to do with upsetting the people around him?

Obviously it did: several people (you can see others in the background) had their cameraphones out even before they used the taser.

Read the news stories. Do you know why the police were reaching out for him? To escort him out of the building, since he seemed unwilling to leave under his own power. One news story said he was walking towards the door when they first approached him, but there was a great deal of hallway between where the incident started and the door, you might notice.

Also note that the police were real police, although the people who asked for his ID were civilian university employees. The police were called by the security personnel only after he had refused to leave.

 

[russ_watters]

Heck, I just learned from my mom a few months ago that when I was a little kid, I pulled my shoulder out of its socket by going limp when she was trying to drag me out of a department store! If the cops had done that, that's an instant lawsuit!

 

[Evo]

Evo...did you watch the bit around 3:14?

The guy is being zapped. You hear a sharp scream and his legs go flying up from under him. At the same instant, you see both his hands clearly cuffed behind his back. He IS being tazed after he was cuffed.

Nope, I see him being grabbed, with his hands cuffed and being picked up and carried. That's why he yells. There is no ...handcuffing...taser... Don't you see them grabbing him under the arms and then he yells?

 

[0rthodontist]

Russ, you may make a good point. I don't know how best to carry someone who is resisting, without injuring them. In this case I would guess that they could grab the student around his torso and lift him off the ground, and maybe have another officer grab his legs, but I really don't know. I would assume that a trained police officer would or should know the best way.

 

[russ_watters]

Russ, you may make a good point. I don't know how best to carry someone who is resisting, without injuring them. In this case I would guess that they could grab the student around his torso and lift him off the ground, and maybe have another officer grab his legs, but I really don't know. I would assume that a trained police officer would or should know the best way.

You'd think so, but it really isn't that hard if you think about it...

I'll tell you what - I'll grab him from behind, around the waist - you go for the legs. Sound good to you...?










...how good is your plastic surgeon?