Register – Thursday 16th November 2006:
According to a report on the university’s Daily Bruin, the incident occured at around 11.30 pm on Tuesday when security officers at the Powell Library CLICC computer lab “asked a male student using a computer in the back of the room to leave when he was unable to produce a BruinCard during a random check“.
“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 and cry out in pain. The student also told the officers he had a medical condition.”
The video shows the tasered ne’er-do-well shouting “Here’s your Patriot Act, here’s your fucking abuse of power”, while refusing to get up. Shortly thereafter, the cops tasered him a second time for his trouble.
UCPD officers later confirmed that the man at the receiving end of the righteous tasering was a student, but didn’t name him or give any further details.
Update: This one is nearly off the irony scale. Three UCLA cops were recently given “Tazer Awards” for subduing a mental patient earlier this year! Way to go guys, treat yourself to an extra donut! Maybe if you’re lucky Santa will bring you some quadriplegic kids to zap!
Update II: The victim in this attack, Mostafa Tabatabainejad, is accusing the UCLA police of racial profiling…
Associated Press – November 17, 2006:
A student who was shocked by a campus police officer’s Taser gun after he refused to show ID at a UCLA library thought he was being singled out by the officer because of his Middle Eastern appearance, his lawyer said.
Yagman said his client declined to show his school ID because he thought he was being targeted for his appearance. His family is of Iranian descent.
Update III: It appears the UCLA doesn’t trust its internal police force, as the university has ordered an outside and independent probe of this attack.
Los Angeles Times – November 18, 2006:
Hoping to calm the furor created when UCLA police used a Taser to subdue a student studying in Powell Library, the university’s acting chancellor announced Friday that a veteran Los Angeles law enforcement watchdog would head up an independent investigation of the incident.
Norman Abrams said he ordered the probe after the university received numerous calls and e-mails from parents and alumni raising concerns about the officers’ actions during the videotaped Tuesday night arrest, which has been widely seen on TV news and the YouTube website.
“I want to assure them that the UCLA campus is a safe environment. Student safety and treatment are of paramount concern at UCLA,” Abrams said. “We plan to move ahead promptly with a complete and unbiased review.”
Abrams said Bobb has a proven track record looking into allegations of police misconduct, including the Rodney King beating and more recently the riots at the L.A. County jail system.
For everyone who thinks the cops did the right thing, you might want to read this…
One of the issues Bobb’s investigation will examine is whether the officers complied with the university police rules for using Tasers.
Several local police agencies — including the LAPD and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department — allow officers to use Tasers only if a suspect poses a physical threat or is acting combatively.
The sheriff’s policies expressly say deputies can’t use Tasers simply to move someone
There are a lot of nazis in the U.S., and always have been among us. Godwin’s Law is dead, so just let it go. And here they are.
Huey Long said that fascism would come to America, but that we would call it democracy.
Lemme see. We’re supposed to show respect to police? What law would say that?
The man “deserved it”. Under what law?
The cops don’t have to identify themselves to “kids full of themselves”, and can threaten them. Show me the law.
The kid didn’t belong in his own university without ID. I see he was on the dark side… how many white students are tasered, do you think, on the average at UCLA?
The university can set up rules to taser people who don’t show ID. Under what law, exactly?
The police can threaten the population if they feel afraid. Why were they afraid? Were they, oh, doing something wrong? If they can threaten the students, who exactly are they protecting?
There are two types of people. Those who believe in authority and power, and those that believe in people. Jefferson and Adams. Yin, yang. Frat boys and everyone else. Thugs and thinkers.
78. That may well be but the attention of the cop had better be proved to be 100% on the safety of the guy he’s trying to kill or that dude might have a law suit beyond the one he probably already has plans to launch.
RBG
87. Because people who actually are suffering that much pain will respond within the first microsecond to avoid more of the same.
RBG
I don’t believe he couldn’t stand. He sure didn’t say “I can’t stand” while still able to say a lot of other things. Here is the case of a guy just itching for a fight right from the first moment. That said, I still condemn the police as per my #43 and see a lot of fault on both sides. I predict the court case will be dismissed due to trespass laws and the University will change their procedures to avoid a repeat.
RBG
The guy was probably being a jerk about the whole thing seeings how he was a student and would have been allowed to say if he had his ID.
I am willing to bet that he will not have to worry about tuition once the sharks get to this.
I know the cops are going to be unemployed soon. Here’s hoping they are incarcerated too.
A young student, not cooperative, but not resisting, is tasered four times, and three times it seems in handcuffs… and yet more than half the chowderheads who’ve come out of the woodwork, like cockroaches, to snipe cannot find anything but contempt for this human life. This, despite having no first hand knowledge whatsoever of what actually went down. The only thing that absolutely certain from this video, and the various media reports is that they could have just dragged the kid out peacefully, but they’d rather thump a kid.
Mayor Daley would have been proud.
Governor Rhodes would have awarded them a medal.
After seeing all the beatings and killings, almost always of minorities, in this country, at the hands of hamfisted cops, you still herald the ultimate authority of law and order over civility and reason. I guess you gotta break a few eggs to make an omlette, huh?
I guess it’s stupid to argue at this point. The cooler, smarter minds have tried but the jackboots are cheerleading the goon squad, and they’ll sure not tolerate an uppity Arab.
WTF does getting tazed in a library have to do with the fricken Patriot Act? Guy sounded like a jerk. A**hat made ME want to taze him! Nobody ever gets on film what provoked the cops in the 1st place, only the response.
80. Does that Lancet Medical Journal in 2001say whether the Taser was tested in dart-mode or drive-stun mode? Because there is a big difference in the stun power. For example, the wider the distance the darts hits a body, the more powerful the effect. Drive-stun has electrodes always the minimal distance apart.
From the Palm Beach Post, an article critical of Taser use:
http://tinyurl.com/j8vxw
includes the following re drive-stun mode:
“The Taser training manual advises that because it is not incapacitating, this mode can lead to “prolonged struggles” and that “it is in these types of scenarios that officers are often facing accusations of excessive force.””
“Even in its paralyzing mode, one shock may not be enough to subdue a violent suspect, according to the Taser training manual, which advises that officers “should anticipate a second or third application.””
RBG
#86, gq,
You cite the law on Obstruction of Justice. Now cite a law that states citizens are required to obey police officers. Then, can you cite the law that allows police to beat, tazer, or pepper spray someone if you disobey. Can’t find one? That is because there isn’t one.
FYI, they didn’t even charge him with trespassing. They charged him with obstructing police, a charge that will not stick. Why? Because he is not required to identify himself. The police may apprehend him but once they have IDed him, they would no longer to have any reason to hold him. The Supreme Court said the police may detain someone for identity, but there isn’t a charge for someone who doesn’t give their ID. But from the NJ statute, the cop that refused to identify himself sounds like he should also be charged with obstruction.
You are wrong on so many levels. Ask the cops charged with beating Rodney King. Police policy is not a defense to assault.
ya know, there a lot of people in power who want to monitor the populace because of the hidden “terror” element (aka govt doesnt trust its people) – and while the justification for that is debateable, it appears that there will have to be a distinct change in thought of those who practice it.
aka you’ll see a lot more abuse of power by the police in the future, not because it happens more and more (it always happening), but because of more passive electronic monitoring.
***
I say we find these cops and do what the S. Koreans do and deride them so much that they become public scapegoats, and then they’ll quietly kill themselves in shame, and fade from the public radar.
It doesn’t matter if the guy with the weapon is right or not, if he is a cop or not. Common sense dictates you should do as he says because the risk of him just losing his cool and shooting you is just not worth it in most situations, and the only think at stake here was the student’s pride. You never know beforehand if you are dealing with a jerk with a gun and a swollen head or someone with common sense and true undestanding of the limits of his/her authority and duty. Better to run and fight other day than to be potentially killed for petty things.
Send these “police” your comments. Here’s the chiefs email address:
Chief of Police,
Karl T. Ross
825-1633
kross@ucpd.ucla.edu
Anyone who asks to be shown the law that says “blah blah blah” is just lazy. They are the type of people who think themselves really smart, but don’t actually add anything to the conversation. What’s more, is even if you show these people the laws they have asked to see, they will still not agree with you. Though I do appreciate your post, Adam. It makes it very clear.
I will also repeat that every argument in favour of that kids actions has been nothing but name calling or challenges like “show me the law…”. Nothing real. OhForTheLoveOf even stooped so low as to say anyone who agrees with the cops is a racist.
Fuck you, OhForTheLoveOf. Tell me what race I am before you call me racist against Arabs.
The police were absolutely correct in how they handled the situation. People need to learn to obey authority. If he was a student he had no right to be in the building without ID. This is protects all the students and staff. I can’t stand when people think they can just do what ever they want without consequences.
It’s hilarious how all these police lovers, who have never posted before, come out of the woodwork to agree with each other on these sorts of issues. It’s pretty obvious that one of these losers, Ascii King maybe, logs on under 20 different names to support himself.
I’m a producer for the BBC’s global discussion radio programme World Have Your Say. We want to talk about this incident on our show tonight (on air at 1800GMT / 1300ET / 1000PST ).
What do you think about this incident? Were you there, can you tell us what happened? Have you witnessed tazers used somewhere else?
If you’re interested to talk to us about coming on the programme, you can:
call: +44 207 557 0635
email: worldhaveyoursay@bbc.co.uk with your number and we’ll call you back
Or contact us here to find out more about the programme
Thanks, James
The kids are stupid and full of themselves. The cops overreacted and are full of themselves. This is UCLA. How can any sane person see anything wrong with simply setting off a nuke in the center of campus? What would be lost? What could possibly be worth saving there?
#104, Hiibel doesn’t help. The man was intoxicated and asked to be arrested, so he was.
Graham doesn’t count, apparently this student was not told he was under arrest. Even if he was, the force may only be to the degree required. A restrained prisoner poses minimal risk at worse and there has been no evidence suggesting he was a danger. Passive resistance is not impeding or obstructing the police. It might not make their job easier, but it isn’t obstruction.
Hurteau is correct. But they do not have any authority to use excessive force, or indeed any force more then required.
Vanvorous, says exactly the same thing.
Ok, some fuzzy decisions, I notice you cited the the jurisdiction on only one case, so I have no idea if the other cases are valid, have been overturned, the minority decision was quoted, etc.
The argument isn’t whether or not he needs to identify himself. That is a given. The discussion is whether the use of force fit the crime.
#68 #70 joe
Actually…you’re the idiot…it does not matter what time it is, if the building is open, that means there are people working in it still. It does not take much effort and ability to check for student ID at libraries and computer labs prior to admission.
Also, you’re argument is flawed. What does a freshman girl being raped in the dorms have anything to do with having proper identification at the library? It was unfortunate that the incident occurred, but having your ID on you at all times would have prevented it how? As you said, the assailants were allowed in by other students holding the door open for them. So…who would have checked them for ID? You make it seem like attending students are incapable of rape either…
And yes, I also dormed as well and am very familiar with having the magnetic swipe on entrance doors. It’s not a perfect system and there are many ways around it. As I said before, a better system would be to having security check for ID prior to allowing person(s) into the building. It’s not very difficult, but it’s a lot more effective then the removal process of someone from the premises if they cannot provide identification.
The university lost total control of this situation. And the tazer should only be used when there is a reasonable threat. A disrespectful, cocky-ass student whom is refusing to give identification is not exactly a reasonable threat to the police officers or to others around him.
People need to learn to obey authority. …
I can’t stand when people think they can just do what ever they want without consequences.
Comment by Marc — 11/17/2006 @ 5:37 am
This is the kind of police state that voters voted against in the mid-term elections. Those that advocate such a position have been removed from power. Well, except for the wannabe dictator, and he has a lot of explaining to do.
You are correct. The police will now have to face the consequences. So will the University.
#6 – Only a moron would think a two or four year degree directly relates to intelligence, especially in this case.
This thread is hot for some reason… I’m guessing liberals who think this story has to do something with the national elections (see #113). Nice stretch.
#104 Adam
All of the cases you cite do not answer the question “can you cite the law that allows police to beat, tazer, or pepper spray someone if you disobey”
The cases you cite all involve reasonable suspicion that a crime was either in commission or had been committed. Not just blatant “YOU MUST OBEY A POLICE OFFICER AT ALL TIMES” in you first case the man was publicly intoxicated. In your last case there was a car chase and at one point an officers life was directly in danger.
I applaud your ability to cite case law but you totally missed the point of that previous posts question.
Your case law does properly address whether or not the police used reasonable force. I am not sure they did in this case but you did show proper case law in their defense.
How does all of this apply?
Well…… A police officer does not have the law to just tazer or pepper spray you for just simply disobeying them. They must have suspicion that you committed a crime or a crime is in process by you at that moment. Not obeying them does not qualify as commiting a crime! If you interfere with their duty of upholding the law you are technically in obstruction of justice and open for a good shock.
BUT
Lets say even an uninformed officer tells you and your naked girl friend to make snow angels. You do not have to OBEY that officer because he is not in the process of upholding the law. Not because he is uninformed but because he is not upholding the law.
http://tinyurl.com/yaytu9
So – to sum up:
1) The student was leaving when cops arrive, just like he had been asked.
2) The cops detained him for no reason.
3) The kids then acted a bit like a dick.
4) The cops went nuts and tazered him – which is not reasonable force when said kid is just sitting down.
5) The other kids around when “OMG WTF??!”
6) Kid starts screaming and shouting, including something rather irrelevant (technically anyhow, not philosophically) about the patriot act.
6) Cops tazer the kid again because he can’t get up most likley because he was just tazered.
7) Kids ask for badge ID of cop, cop reacts with threats.
Basically – the cops overreacted completely. They should be fired. The kid should use it as a learning experience (don’t act aggressive to large men with weapons – you’ll get fucked up), and there should be adjustments to the attitude of both students and cops.
But anyone who defends the cops here is just wrong. There is no way you can characterize it as “reasonable force”, and none of the legal arguments GG or Adam have put forward apply because they either are inapplicable (he wasn’t obstructing them until THEY tazered him) or are actually in support of the kid (they didn’t use reasonable force).
I say: bring on the mass student protests.
A textbook-perfect example of police procedure. The loquacious little twerp was given every chance to obey a reasonable request, and received exactly what could be expected by disobeying it. He’s entitled to “speak truth to power”, but he’s gonna meet Mr. Capacitor as a result. What a whiny little putz.
#117 “The loquacious little twerp was given every chance to obey a reasonable request…”
I’ll say it again. You’re a cop and you want someone to leave an area. Do you….
A: Let him leave or
B: Do you grab his arm, refuse to let him go, then tazer him. And then when he’s on the floor requesting medical help, tazer him again.
Exactly what method I described above is the best means of getting someone out of an area? Thanks!
115. The suspicion was that he committed the crime or the crime was in process by him at that moment of trespass.
RBG
Adam do you see now why I say it’s a waste of time to hunt up the laws when they ask for them? All they ever do is deny what you give them and ask for more. They are too lazy to think.
Sorry #115 J and #116 but you are both wrong in assuming the kid had done nothing. And for the last time, the police didn’t want him to leave, security did. The police were there investigating a crime because they were called.
The kid was committing a crime. He was trespassing. The school decided to use the police to enforce their rule. They later dropped the charges after the whole thing became a big deal. Since the kid was trespassing and the officers were there to investigate the incident of trespassing, the kid was obstructing justice by refusing to answer the questions. Same as the example Adam posted.
The kid did not passively resist the police. He started to shout “Get off me.” as soon as they grabbed him. A suspect in an investigation does not have the right to decide if he wants to be touched or not, the police do. The kid became passive after they hit him with the Taser.
The police Could have handled it differently, but they did not break any laws handling it the way they did. The argument is not whether it was reasonable force or not, the argument is whether the police were breaking the law or not by using the Taser on him.
If the use of the Taser in that situation is against the law, then they are indeed the thugs you claim them to be.
As for the racial profiling, I am a firm believer that that sort of thing happens all the time. However, in this case it was not the police who did the racial profiling, but the local security guard that went around checking for ID. Also, if the students WEAR their ID, like a nametag type thing, then it would be easy to see who isn’t wearing one and ask them to show it. It seems it would be hard to prove racial profiling in a case like this unless the students don’t wear the ID AND the security guard only asked brown people to prove they were students.
UCLA has now dropped a few 1000 places down the “someday I’d like to go to that university” list.
#119: “trespass”
Trespass?! The student was a STUDENT. God how hard is that to understand?! He paid money to attend the school. The school rule merely states that “Students should carry” carry their IDs. The rule does not say that students “shall” or “must” carry them! See #29.
Exactly how does not having a student ID make him a trespasser?!
#119 RGB
Oh I agree with you on that for sure assuming we have the whole story.
#120 Asccii King
I didn’t assume anything From the details I have think they had every right to detain him. Again, assuming we have the whole story.
Just so you know I referenced all of those cases and they do not apply to the fact that a police officer must be obeyed at all times. There is no such law and posting case law that only applies to reasonable force doesn’t prove otherwise.