UCLA Police Taser Student For Not Showing ID W/Video

origionally posted by Voidmaster
and that they were perfectly within their rights by tasering him

Right

Originally posted by gekko

I have never truly understood how people like Stalin, Mao and Hitler could get away with it, until now.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Originally posted by gekko
Voidmaster, exactly what kind of aggression do you refer to, apart from the kid raising his voice?

I could go down the list.

Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
I don't know his body language other then screaming "don't touch me" in a very emotional way and not listening to them (since they had to repeat things over and over). This could be percieved as a threat by police.

Don't get into an argument with the police.
He broke this one.

Don't resist even if you believe you are innocent.
He broke this too.

Don't complain on the scene or tell the police they're wrong or that you're going to file a complaint.
He started shouting, asking for badge numbers, complaining about the Patriot Act, and other stuff, so he broke this one too.


Those above are from the ACLU. That student broke every rule. If he would have either showed his student id (on school property) or simply gone with the police (probably escorted off the property because he couldn't prove he was a student) then he wouldn't have got tazed.

He decided to refuse to comply. He basically tazed himself I'm thinking.

Hey there those ACLU recomendations are there to help you not become a VICTEM of police brutality. They are actually saying that because a great many police officers are unreasonably short tempered and of poor disposition to be in a position of authority that you have to modify normal human behavior as to not prevoke these overly agressive people like the police. Your really astute there. I'm shure you did good on your reading aptitude tests. You know the parts where you have to read something and then correctly interprete what the author was implying based on the context of their words.

It doesn't matter if he was wrong or not, that isn't the problem

The problem is they shocked a guy 5 times, when he was hand cuffed.

Ill tell you what, Ill hand cuff you, taser you for 3 seconds, then give you say 15-20 second to get up before i taser you again.

Think you will be able to do it houdini?

Answer me this everyone for the tasering, Why couldn't they simply pick him up when he went limp rather then taser him?

But Zeddicus, failure to comply does not warrant tasering. Tasers are not a tongue in cheek toy to be used as a prod. In the video, at about 1:28 into in, when we finally get a view what's going on, we can see two large officers supporting this guy under each arm. Handcuffed behind the back. Instead of dragging the man out, they continue to command standing orders and taser the hell out of him when he doesn't. This little game continues all the way down the hall and presumeably till they got outdoors. It was like they would taser him, make him wiggle, then drag him a little, yell some more standing orders, taser, wiggle, drag a little more. Continue till outdoors.

Completely disgusting abuse.

Did the guy break the rules? Yes. Is getting zapped like that justice? I don't think so. I don't care if it is the police given right to zap the # out of a kid or not.
From my point of view this is a problem and a lot of people just don't care. These tasers are being used as punishment instead of a non-lethal alternative to shooting a suspect.
I’ve seen it even on reality cop shows. This woman hits a cop who is arresting her boyfriend. That is wrong and she should be tried in court and punished accordingly.
What happens next is that the woman is pinned down and tasered twice. She was already subdued already unable to do anything.

Tasers are brought into law enforcement as a non-leathal alternative to guns. If tasers were not in existence what would these police officers have done?
Haul the guy out?
Beat him with batons?
Shoot him?
I would like to think that they would just cuff him and pull him out of the library.

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

Originally posted by gekko
Voidmaster, exactly what kind of aggression do you refer to, apart from the kid raising his voice?

I could go down the list.

Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
I don't know his body language other then screaming "don't touch me" in a very emotional way and not listening to them (since they had to repeat things over and over). This could be percieved as a threat by police.

Don't get into an argument with the police.
He broke this one.

Don't resist even if you believe you are innocent.
He broke this too.

Don't complain on the scene or tell the police they're wrong or that you're going to file a complaint.
He started shouting, asking for badge numbers, complaining about the Patriot Act, and other stuff, so he broke this one too.


Those above are from the ACLU. That student broke every rule. If he would have either showed his student id (on school property) or simply gone with the police (probably escorted off the property because he couldn't prove he was a student) then he wouldn't have got tazed.

He decided to refuse to comply. He basically tazed himself I'm thinking.

When did the ACLU become the be all end all of acceptable behavior in the face of authority. This guy had natural reactions to what was going on. He's sitting in a campus library. Cops come up to him in a campus library. Things get heated on both sides and then the cops tazers him a ridiculous amount of times while screaming at him. And then cops threatened other students. If this was in a huge protest or something like that I might agree with some of what you're saying however if I'm sitting in my campus library and I'm in the same situation I probably would've acted in the same way. Should I expect to be jumped by cops everywhere I go now? Do I have to study the ACLU's procedures on how to deal with police?

Also this was filmed on a camera phone, I really don't think this was a setup.

Criminal Misconduct

(mod hat off)

Some of my thoughts:

The video doesn't show everything. In fact, quite a lot of information necessary to develop an informed opinion about this incident is not available in the video(s) or anywhere else.

Prejudice is a poor substitute for facts.

Resisting arrest is illegal in California, as it is in all states of the union.

Campus security is an important issue in California and the rest of the U.S., where crimes against students (including mass school shootings) are a hot-button issue. Authorities are expected to protect students, and are under a lot of pressure to do so.

I'm puzzled about the "tase and stand up" and "drive stun" doctrines, and would like to better understand the concept and science behind them.

Even if you are being unjustly arrested or abused by police, the absolute WORST thing you can do is resist arrest. Rather, the place to resolve such problems is via the legal system, in court.

If you are a bystander who disagrees with an arrest, DO NOT crowd around the cops, shout and make threatening gestures. You may get shot -- and deserve it. Interfering with police in the performance of their duties is illegal in all 50 states.

NEVER threaten cops or anyone else. It's just not a good idea, and is quite illegal.

On the other hand, DO use that cell phone or camera to take pictures and film the event. Gathering evidence is a good thing to do, and if there is police misconduct, such evidence can help secure a conviction against police acting illegally.

Whatever the beef was, it got a lot worse when this guy decided to make a scene by staying after being asked to leave -- before the police were called.

The worst crime of all: never yell in a library! People are trying to study, fer Pete's sake.

(mod hat on)

It's natural and okay for ATSers to disagree about something like this, but it is important to remember that no matter what our opinions may be, we must express them in accordance with the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use.

Specifically, let's please resist the temptation to call names and label other members "sheeple", "Nazis" or whatever because they hold different opinions about this or any topic.

Mutual respect and tolerance of differing opinions is a necessary foundation for free expression in our forums.

Violators will be tased.

(Just kidding!)




Edits: Grammar, spelling and adding this:

Google results for "drive stun" taser

From that search, an interesting Globe and Mail (Canada) article:

"How Can You Justify Using A Taser 12 Times?"

[edit on 11/17/2006 by Majic]

Originally posted by Majic


Violators will be tased.

(Just kidding!)

Forgive me if I was tense in this thread. If you read my posts from beginning to end (if you have a ridiculous amount of time on your hands) you'll see I was initially open to the police response and then after watching the video I got really angry. I personally am okay with police, and aside from W.T.O. (which I was personally at) I've had good experiences with most cops I encounter on a day to day basis. I think what bothered me so much about this is that this happened to a kid my age on a college campus like mine and I take that very personally because I could see the same thing happening to me or someone I know and I felt like this was unacceptable. However, I guess if you disagree with the situation there's been a host of contact information in this thread on how and to who you can voice your feelings at. And if you're okay with what happened, it's cool to move on.

[edit on 17-11-2006 by CuriousSkeptic]

Yeah this is getting a little heated. A natural reaction to injustice. However, I prepose we turn down the burners on this debat from high to maybe a comfortable low/medium. Before flames set things on fire.

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
our really astute there. I'm shure you did good on your reading aptitude tests. You know the parts where you have to read something and then correctly interprete what the author was implying based on the context of their words.

All I did was post some ACLU tips that this guy didn't really seem to follow. What's the problem with that and WHY are you attacking my intelligence rather then the issue? I DO have a tazer you know.

I never said the cops were right or that I'm even and expert in this issue. I said it appears the he was non-compliant to thier requests and that he didn't follow the posted ACLU guidelines. Why are they guidelines? Because if he had followed some of them...he might have a case for abuse.

nextguyinline - Great comment and I hear what you're saying, but failure to comply does get you arrested. Now if you're in cuffs (which I don't know that he was at first) and you refuse to get up off the ground...there are only a couple options to get outside. One of those is to walk out under your own power. If the cop doesn't want to carry a struggling person a very long way, the use of a tazer might be justified in promping the person to comply (move or I'll zap you again).

In the old days, they could (and did) use the old nightstick and physical force. At that point, you're going outside on way or the other.



If I had a guy in my house and he refused to leave under his own power, well...I would let him stay forever and just live around him rather then have cops force him out. I would call him Sully and feed him cookies, but I would never let him be forced out. That is just wrong. It's probably why I always had a dude living on my couch after a big party.

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

If I had a guy in my house and he refused to leave under his own power, well...I would let him stay forever and just live around him rather then have cops force him out. I would call him Sully and feed him cookies, but I would never let him be forced out. That is just wrong. It's probably why I always had a dude living on my couch after a big party.

I think the problem now is that there's so many conflicting reports going on. The police are saying one thing, the media is saying another and eye-witnesses another. There's now about five or six versions of the story floating around out there and I think as you said earlier we now don't have enough information to know what's what.

I left this thread with a few pages and it has blown up over night. I did find that many people don't know the facts about the policy at the library and assume many things without knowing what actually happened. Read all the posts that have links to the policy and the hiring practices for the UCPD.

I am sure that we all agree that this guy was in the wrong. He had a chance to leave but didn't. Why?

Some of you feel security did the wrong thing. I feel that the amount of time spent before they tazed him is what caused you to feel this way. If they were to wait 10-15 minutes after they asked him over and over to leave would you change your mind about him? Is the amount of time they spent deciding what to do the main reason you feel security did the wrong thing? With that said, do any of you know the latest info about crimes on that campus? Do any of you know the severity of the crimes that are committed? I would rather see security preventing someone getting robbed or something very severe then wasting any time on a guy who becomes very ignorant in a library. Their time is better spend on other things, if that is the case with the data that would give us a picture of the criminal activity on that campus. We don't know this, so don't judge security for doing what they did.

When most humans enter a conflist they do one of 2 things, fight or flee. This is a clear case of the guy fighting, not fleeing. Why did he decide to resist? I still wonder why he didn't listen to the CSA when he was asked to leave before security showed up.

The policy about having an ID after 11pm is posted in the library. Those who fail to read this are asking for trouble. This has been called many things on this thread, but it is a policy that must be followed.

If this guy tries to sue he won't get anything in court. We don't know what happened before the video started besides he wouldn't leave when asked. He won't get anything from a jury when the facts are presented. Some of you fail to read the facts and base your opinion on your emotions. Base your opinions on facts and since we don't have all of them don't rush to judge anyone.

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
I don't know his body language other then screaming "don't touch me" in a very emotional way and not listening to them (since they had to repeat things over and over). This could be percieved as a threat by police.

Sure... but, we don't really see much in the video apart from kids legs kicking violently as he is getting zapped (I believe that's expectable). The eye witnesses seems to agree he was not aggressive.

Are screaming "don't touch me" good reason for the police to taser him?

Don't get into an argument with the police.
He broke this one.

Sure, I wouldn't have made the decisions he made, but is arguing alone justification for the police to taser him?

Don't resist even if you believe you are innocent.
He broke this too.

I don't see that he physically resists, neither does the eye witnesses. Only you and the cops...

Or are you telling me that sitting down is justification for the police to taser him? 5 times?

Don't complain on the scene or tell the police they're wrong or that you're going to file a complaint.
He started shouting, asking for badge numbers, complaining about the Patriot Act, and other stuff, so he broke this one too.

As far as I can understand it was another student who angry but calmly asked for a badge number. The cops answer? "Step back, or you'll get some of the same"

He decided to refuse to comply. He basically tazed himself I'm thinking.

Oh, Zed! You are SO funny! Not.


Why do I bother arguing? Well, If I don't I can see this looming on the horizon:



Open on cops beating up a jaywalker.

Cop: "Move along everyone, nothing to see here. Hey! You with the beard! Looking at me are you? Want some of this??"

Gekko: "Dude. What has that guy done to deserve a beating?"

BZZZZAPBZZZ!!

Gekko: "AAAAAAAAAAARGH, please stop officer, please, I swear I will never look at a cop again!

Cop: "Sure you wont"

Zoom into Taser descending towards Gekkos tear-filled eyes.

BZZZZAPBZZZ!!

Cut to black.

The end.

From the Daily Bruin
dailybruin.com...

Neither the video footage nor eyewitness accounts of the events confirmed that Tabatabainejad encouraged resistance, and he repeatedly told the officers he was not fighting and would leave.

Tabatabainejad was walking with his backpack toward the door when he was approached by two UCPD officers, one of whom grabbed the student's arm. In response, Tabatabainejad yelled at the officers to "get off me." Following this demand, Tabatabainejad was stunned with a Taser.

[edit on 17-11-2006 by CuriousSkeptic]

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
I don't know his body language other then screaming "don't touch me" in a very emotional way and not listening to them (since they had to repeat things over and over). This could be percieved as a threat by police.

Don't get into an argument with the police.
He broke this one.

Don't resist even if you believe you are innocent.
He broke this too.

Don't complain on the scene or tell the police they're wrong or that you're going to file a complaint.
He started shouting, asking for badge numbers, complaining about the Patriot Act, and other stuff, so he broke this one too.


Those above are from the ACLU. That student broke every rule. If he would have either showed his student id (on school property) or simply gone with the police (probably escorted off the property because he couldn't prove he was a student) then he wouldn't have got tazed.

He decided to refuse to comply. He basically tazed himself I'm thinking.

The ACLU??



We know who owns and controls the legal system don't we?



I would be eager to do what you suggest and the cult that is behind the ACLU suggests but prove to me that the legal system is well... honest?

What you suggest here is the right thing to do from a purely PRACTICAL point of view but not from an ideological point of view.

But it all hinges on a fair trial where every man and woman has equal access to justice and frankly I do not believe that exists in a legal system where cults of secret societies and religions run it and it is based on MONEY $$.

If they are just campus security and it was just a deal that the kid left his ID in his room or something, why not just call the real Police if in fact he was asked to leave and didn't. I think that was pretty cruel and the rent-a-cops just kept repeating those words to make themselves appear as though what they were doing was justified in front of the witnesses. They were probably tired of taseing each other for practice and wanted real student targets for a change. I hope that kid sues their pants off, cuz no matter what, it seemed overdone and extremly sadistic and unnecessary.


Pie

While the taser is a very effective tool, and is designed quite well, it is indiscriminate about who uses it.

Our department didn't carry any kind of electrical stun device until the early 1980's. Even then, only a few of the officers carried them.

I think that the design in general is to prevent injury to police officers, civilians, and suspects (to some extent). The problem is that officers use them for compliance rather than just protection.

Listening to smart mouth punks, getting beat on, and getting ticked off is all part of the job. Anyone who can't handle that on a daily basis doesn't need to be in the law enforcement field. Tasers are not a legal conduit for police officers to express their "unhappy feelings" towards a suspect.

HOWEVER

If this was prior to 1993 (when I retired), and I would have told someone to leave, I would have expected them to leave. If someone was taking their time leaving, I made sure to give them an incentive to speed it up a little (often times this meant making a little physical contact and escorting them out).

If the suspect would have been combative (or just refused to leave), I would have most likely charged them with disorderly conduct and let them spend the night in jail. Unless the suspect has a weapon, I don't see why two police officers can't take care of them.

ANOTHER THING

Most campus police officers are recognized as "real" peace officers and do in fact have the same powers as other police officers (including arrest, ect).

www.ucpd.ucla.edu...

From the About UCPD page:

Police officers of the UCLA Police Department are duly sworn peace officers under section 830.2(b) of the California Penal Code. The officers of the department are armed and possess the same authority under the law as municipal police officers. UCLA Police Officers patrol the campus 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. They enforce the law, arrest violators, investigate and suppress crime, investigate traffic and bicycle accidents, and provide a full range of services to the community. The Police Department enforces all applicable local, state and federal laws.

[edit on 11/17/2006 by JBurns]

Originally posted by Masisoar

Originally posted by ludaChris


As I said before, were you there? As someone pointed out earlier, it appears the kid or whoever was resisting his own removal from somewhere he didnt belong? What would you say if the police resorted to physical violence and broke the kids arm, or dislocated his shoulder? Youd be saying the same #. Do you know anything about police procedure? About investigating an unruly individual in a public place who has been warned by local security and how you approach that individual? I thought not. So how bout you shut your yap about # you dont know about OK???

I love where you're getting at, because you're clearly taking offense to this. Hmm mission accomplished. And yeah I'd say the same thing.. since when does it take so much to bring someone out of a building.

Goooddbyeeee.

In the video the student was clearly resisting. He appeared to be in handcuffs and as they were trying to walk him through a doorway you could see him stiffen and stop complying. The video didn't keep a clear image of him so it's hard to say what changed as far as his compliance. Pure speculation - if he made an agressive move towards someone then they might have some reason for the taser. If they're trying to get him out of the building and he's not complying (tensing his body, locking his legs, etc) I agree that tasering him isn't going to help the process.

What bothers me is how did we get to the point of him being led out of the building in cuffs that lad him to noncompliance and tasering or other use of force being neccessary. What was the probable cause for this contact. The article, if it is correct in all of its facts, states the a community services officer (CSO) asked him for an ID during a "random check". Most agencies, here in California, that employ a CSO position make them non-sworn ... ie, an unarmed uniformed position that is not charged with the responsibility of enforcing laws ... meaning they can give out tickets and citations but can not legally detain someone anymore than you, me or some security gaurd.

What I'm getting at is what was the legality of the contact. I sure hope there is some sort of municipal code that allowes them to ask this of library or college patrons otherwise they are definitely in the wrong for the original contact that led to this conclusion. If there is some sort of municipal code that permits a random ID check at specific locations then why is a law being enforced by a non-sworn member of the department (if the article is correct) ... what would/could a CSO do if they ran a warrant check and this guy was wanted for a violent felony ... he would not have the training or skills to protect himself or others and the suspect would know the jig was up and might be in a flight or fight response.

All I know is I am very pro law enforcement, for many reasons. But I would have a problem forking over my ID for the pleasure of sitting in a park or library. If there is a complaint on me either being loud or somehow bothersome or even the generic "suspicious" then fine because the officer is there investigating that complaint, even if it is unfounded.

How would you feel if you were pulled over while driving to be told you had commited no infraction, no probable cause for detainment existed but they just wanted to check your ID and make sure you were legally licensed? I know I would be asking

I agree with JBurns, and its sobering to get a persprective from an "oldschool copper".

If he had been dragged outside and chucked in jail over night, few if anyone would have had a problem with it.

The problem is mean little bastards with tasers, abusing their power.

Oh, and from the news reports I read earlier; it was real cops, NOT rentacops. They work on campus, but they work for LAPD.

Wether this makes it better or worse I cant decide.

Edit to ad;

SmallMindsBigIdeas:

According to several sources, its UCLA library policy to check everyones ID after 11pm as they have had problems with homeless people spending the night there.

[edit on 17/11/06 by gekko]