Thu Sep 20, 2012, 01:45 AM

cory777 (1,384 posts)

Pepper-spraying campus police won't face charges

Source: Associated Press

DAVIS, Calif. (AP) — The University of California, Davis police officers who doused students and alumni with pepper spray during a campus protest last November won't face criminal charges, prosecutors said Wednesday.

The chemical crackdown prompted widespread condemnation, campus protests and calls for the resignation of Chancellor Linda Katehi after videos shot by witnesses were widely played online. Images of an officer casually spraying orange pepper-spray in the faces of nonviolent protesters became a rallying point for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

But the Yolo County District Attorney's office said in a statement that there was insufficient evidence to prove the use of force was illegal.

A task force appointed by the university concluded in April that the Nov. 18 pepper-spraying was "objectively unreasonable" and could have been prevented.

Uncensored Activist News - http://activistnews.org/

13 replies, 1936 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

13 replies	Author	Time	Post
Pepper-spraying campus police won't face charges (Original post)	cory777	Sep 2012	OP
But they can be sued. nt	bemildred	Sep 2012	#1
+1,000,000 $$$$$	NYC_SKP	Sep 2012	#2
They have no jobs.	MiaCulpa	Sep 2012	#3
Uh... They did sue, and received a large settlement.	jberryhill	Sep 2012	#4
awesome!	MiaCulpa	Sep 2012	#11
Insurance settlement.	yardwork	Sep 2012	#9
"insufficient evidence"? Oh my! /nt	Festivito	Sep 2012	#5
Silly commoner!	VWolf	Sep 2012	#6
The official press release:	Auggie	Sep 2012	#7
Insufficient evidence.	WilliamPitt	Sep 2012	#8
Yolo county DA is a RW Republican	Ash_F	Sep 2012	#10
Unreal	blackspade	Sep 2012	#12
how can that picture be insufficient evidence	leftyohiolib	Sep 2012	#13

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 01:46 AM

bemildred (67,500 posts)

1. But they can be sued. nt

Reply to this post

Response to bemildred (Reply #1)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 01:52 AM

NYC_SKP (48,793 posts)

2. +1,000,000 $$$$$

Reply to this post

Response to bemildred (Reply #1)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 01:53 AM

MiaCulpa (750 posts)

3. They have no jobs.

The students likely don't have money to even attempt to sue, student debt and all.

Reply to this post

Response to MiaCulpa (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:03 AM

jberryhill (29,884 posts)

4. Uh... They did sue, and received a large settlement.

Reply to this post

Response to jberryhill (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 01:56 PM

MiaCulpa (750 posts)

11. awesome!

Thanks, had not heard that.

Reply to this post

Response to MiaCulpa (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 09:31 AM

yardwork (37,074 posts)

9. Insurance settlement.

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 06:07 AM

Festivito (12,283 posts)

5. "insufficient evidence"? Oh my! /nt

Reply to this post

Response to Festivito (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 08:40 AM

VWolf (2,522 posts)

6. Silly commoner!

Dontcha know?

One set of rules for us.
Another set for them.

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 08:43 AM

Auggie (16,181 posts)

7. The official press release:

(Woodland, CA) No criminal charges will be filed against University of California, Davis officers involved in the November 18, 2011, pepper spraying of students on the University Quad. A 13 page District Attorney report outlines the reasons for the determination.

The report concludes “viewing the incident through the totality of the circumstances, there is insufficient evidence to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the use of force involved in the November 18, 2011, pepper spraying was unlawful and therefore warrants the filing of criminal charges.”

The report defines the legal role of a prosecutor in investigating officer involved misconduct, “The review by Yolo County District Attorney’s Office does not involve an evaluation of administrative, civil or Internal Affairs liability for the participants and it does not involve a review of whether policies and procedures were appropriately followed. In addition, our review does not encompass recommendations concerning how policies and procedures might be altered to minimize potential future risks. The scope of the District Attorney’s review is solely an evaluation of whether the filing of criminal charges is warranted by the events of November 18, 2011.”

The report relies heavily on the factual determinations of the Kroll Report and cites numerous facts and evidence contained within the Kroll Report. Although the Kroll Report concluded that the conduct of Lieutenant Pike was not objectively reasonable, the report acknowledges that the officers in general, “and Lieutenant Pike specifically, believed that they and their prisoners were surrounded by a hostile ‘mob,’ and that the pepper spraying was necessary to clear the pathway so that the officers and their prisoners could leave the Quad safely” and that “a detailed review of the events provides some support for their position.” The District Attorney’s report concludes that in light of these conclusions from the Kroll Report and the additional evidence obtained during the District Attorney’s review of the evidence that there is insufficient evidence to warrant the filing of criminal charges.

For more information, please contact Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney Michael J. Cabral at (530) 666-8406 or via email at michael.cabral@yolocounty.org.

LINK: http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=26&recordid=2167&returnURL=%2findex.aspx%3fpage%3d510

It's easier to base findings on a third-party report than to conduct your own research. Bastards.

The Yolo County D.A. is Jeff Reisig: http://www.jeffreisig.com

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 09:13 AM

WilliamPitt (54,469 posts)

8. Insufficient evidence.

No words.

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:24 AM

Ash_F (1,742 posts)

10. Yolo county DA is a RW Republican

Last edited Thu Sep 20, 2012, 11:26 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

Quick google search finds him plagiarizing articles bashing the ACLU

http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5581:reisig-lifts-huge-portions-of-op-ed-from-da-scullys-april-piece&Itemid=100

...seeking sloppy unconstitutional injunctions(struck down as such)

http://daviswiki.org/Jeff_Reisig

Hand-picked as the favorite successor of the previous DA, whose reign was marred by corruption and malfeasance, and criticized his opponent's disability in a campaign add to barely eek out a win.

http://davisvanguard.blogspot.com/2006/12/2006-year-in-davis-review_6269.html

Young future Yolo county voters take note. Be careful who you vote for.

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:16 PM

blackspade (2,438 posts)

12. Unreal

This is just more ass covering for the militarized police.
Prosecutors will go after OWS protesters for the flimsiest shit and make up charges, but the thugs that beat the crap out of them walk scott free.

What a disgrace. What ever happened to professional ethics?

Reply to this post

Response to cory777 (Original post)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 01:19 PM

leftyohiolib (3,111 posts)

13. how can that picture be insufficient evidence

Reply to this post

Latest Breaking News (Forum)