HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Pepper-sprayed students f...

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 03:27 PM

 

Pepper-sprayed students file lawsuit against UC Davis - Sac Bee

"A lawsuit has been filed in federal court against UC Davis over the pepper-spraying of protesting students by police on Nov. 18.

Nineteen students have brought the suit that says that the university used excessive force to break up the demonstration. The Occupy UC Davis students were sprayed as they sat on the ground.

The suit said that the actions by police that day, which were broadcast around the world, had a chilling effect on free speech.

Among those named as defendants are University of California, Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, various UC Davis officials, the campus police chief and a police officer."

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archives/2012/02/pepper-sprayed-students-filed-lawsuit-against-uc-davis.html#storylink=cpy

If you haven't seen the video that went viral after the incident, it's here:


32 replies, 6812 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Pepper-sprayed students file lawsuit against UC Davis - Sac Bee (Original post)
grahamhgreen Feb 2012 OP
sabrina 1 Feb 2012 #1
Major Hogwash Feb 2012 #2
Devil_Fish Feb 2012 #9
Quantess Feb 2012 #19
Devil_Fish Feb 2012 #20
Quantess Feb 2012 #22
Dont call me Shirley Feb 2012 #3
Auggie Feb 2012 #4
elias7 Feb 2012 #13
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2012 #15
elias7 Feb 2012 #24
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2012 #26
elias7 Feb 2012 #27
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2012 #28
elias7 Feb 2012 #29
Major Hogwash Feb 2012 #21
elias7 Feb 2012 #23
Major Hogwash Feb 2012 #31
elias7 Feb 2012 #32
AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2012 #16
truebrit71 Feb 2012 #5
1620rock Feb 2012 #6
TBF Feb 2012 #7
texshelters Feb 2012 #8
barbtries Feb 2012 #10
SouthernLiberal Feb 2012 #11
sdghjtyjty Feb 2012 #12
alp227 Feb 2012 #14
benld74 Feb 2012 #17
Brother Buzz Feb 2012 #18
Democrat18 Feb 2012 #25
aquart Feb 2012 #30

Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 03:32 PM

1. These cops are costing their cities millions.

Hopefully someone will reign them in from now on. It was a shameful display and I wish there was a way to make individuals who make these wrong decisions, pay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 03:48 PM

2. What took them so long?

I would have had a lawsuit filed by Christmas!!!

If those were my kids, I would have told them to transfer to a less hostile environment. There are other colleges to attend and getting sprayed with pepper spray like that is not worth it. They weren't just "sprayed", they were doused with pepper spray.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 05:41 PM

9. And it wasn't peper spray, it was actually bear reppelant.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Devil_Fish (Reply #9)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 06:02 PM

19. huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quantess (Reply #19)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 09:57 PM

20. That's right, peper spray is in a much smaller can.

 

The spray that was used on these students is super concentrated bear repellant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Devil_Fish (Reply #20)

Fri Feb 24, 2012, 01:40 PM

22. Yikes that's awful.

I did not know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 03:57 PM

3. I hope you (pepper-sprayed students) win!

I appreciate your courage, strength and determination. And thanks for providing us with the endless hours of photo-shopped pepper-spraying cop photos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 03:58 PM

4. I'd love to be on that jury ...

if it goes that far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auggie (Reply #4)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 09:50 PM

13. Exactly why you shouldn't be on that jury

You kind of have to be impartial

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #13)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 12:11 AM

15. No. You have to be one of 12 people too stupid to not be able to get out of jury service.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #15)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 10:14 AM

24. Right, all you have to do is say you've seen the vid and you'd be dismissed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #24)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 12:52 PM

26. How many juries have you selected?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #26)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 06:10 PM

27. Are you telling me that prejudice does not exclude a potential juror?

That would bug me if I were ever on trial for something. I'd prefer to avoid a lynching. But it's ok if we agree with the prejudice?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #27)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 06:59 PM

28. Am I telling you that? You indicate that you have a special expertise w juror qualifications.

 

I'm merely asking a question because I'm skeptical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #28)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 09:35 PM

29. Skeptical of what?

An expertise I never claimed? A right to a fair trial?

If you want to play semantic games, I'm glad at least one of us is getting something out of this.

If you know that jurors will be selected after revealing prejudicial bias, then I will defer to your expertise.

I have no legal experience, but I would hope that our system allows for a defendant to get a fair trial from a jury not clouded by preconceived notion of guilt or innocence.

I suggested that the criteria for jury selection was impartiality. You responded that the criteria was stupidity.

Perhaps I'm being presumptuous in saying a potential juror should be excluded if they saw the video and had rendered an opinion, but instead of agreeing or disagreeing, you are just giving me shit....
Thanks, buddy.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #13)

Fri Feb 24, 2012, 09:10 AM

21. In what sense??

If you have seen the video, how the hell are you going to say it was justified?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #21)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 10:11 AM

23. That's my point, you've already made up your mind.

The idea is to have a fair trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #23)

Sun Feb 26, 2012, 12:32 AM

31. I'd be fair. I'd use the evidence to convict that SOB of assault!

Or whatever else they would charge him with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #31)

Sun Feb 26, 2012, 09:25 AM

32. OK buddy, this is America. Innocent until proven guilty. Sound familiar?

Just because you think you have the moral high ground, doesn't make you right.

Our legal system protects people from being lynched by people are certain of their rightness and don't care about the whole story. I'd be afraid to have you on a jury. You don't sound open-minded. But of course you'd never be on a jury because then you'd "be one of 12 people too stupid to not be able to get out of jury service" and of course you're too smart for that.

I am appalled by what I think I see on that video, but I am not going to render a judgment without hearing the case put before me by both sides. I'm more interested in how and why the cop was ordered to spray the students, not with why he didn't disobey the order. I also believe in due process and suspension of judgment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auggie (Reply #4)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 12:17 AM

16. You should be qualified to be on the jury as well as anyone who has a sense of humanity.

 

Indifference to human suffering and a police use of unnecessary and excessive force has never been legitimately equated with impartiality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 04:01 PM

5. About damned time...

 

..wonder how quick UC goes for a settlement?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 04:10 PM

6. Lots of people fired, and paying damages through the teeth are in order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 04:36 PM

7. Good - it's the only thing they'll pay attention to. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 05:17 PM

8. There needs to be a national investigation

of police departments by the Attorney General, but Eric Holder will never do it.

The costs of this police abuse will cost cities millions in a time of crisis, and if they ask for a bailout, demand firings and resignations and the emptying of these officers pensions to pay for the abuses first.

The impunity is sickening.

PTxS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 08:01 PM

10. good.

they should all be able to pay off their student loans after this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 08:12 PM

11. Good for them!

I really hope that they win and that there are real penalties for the University, and for the officers that participated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Wed Feb 22, 2012, 11:06 PM

14. the comments section on Sacbee.com is such a toxic right wing authoritarian dump DU'ing is futile.

the top one: "These kids were warned. I don't know what else could have been done.

Pepper spray isn't lethal.

So, they can't stand the heat they brought on themselves and they now need a group cry and a group hug.

The cops should sue them for emotional distress and to replace the can of pepper spray."

WTF? Has this comment poster ever been sprayed by pepper spray before?? If pepper spray is not lethal why is it commonly cited as a self defense mechanic against someone mugging you for instance?

But at least this comment is worthy of more thumbs up (voting on this site doesn't require registration):

"It should be remembered that many of the rights we have today as United States citizens have been founded on civil disobedience just as the Occupy movement has with this modern protest..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 11:48 AM

17. THAT is the toughest way to get your education paid for I have ever seen! GO STUDENTS!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Thu Feb 23, 2012, 01:39 PM

18. Sidebar: UC Davis Chancellor Survives No-Confidence Vote Following Pepper Spray Incident

UC Davis Chancellor Survives No-Confidence Vote Following Pepper Spray Incident


February 17, 2012

DAVIS (CBS/AP) – Nearly three months after campus police pepper-sprayed a group of peaceful Occupy protesters, UC Davis faculty members voted against a motion that would have expressed a lack of confidence in the ability of the school’s chancellor to lead the campus, university officials said Friday.

Members of the University of California, Davis Academic Senate had two weeks to vote on a motion that would have expressed “no-confidence” in Chancellor Linda Katehi’s leadership after the widely condemned pepper-spray incident.

The final tally showed faculty members voted 697-312 against the motion, officials said.

In a companion motion, faculty voted 586-408 in favor of expressing confidence in Katehi’s leadership but condemning the use of pepper spray during the Nov. 18 incident.

The motions are nonbinding but could influence UC leaders as they consider the future of the 57-year-old Katehi, who became chancellor of the 32,000-student campus in 2009.

<more>

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/02/17/uc-davis-chancellor-facing-confidence-vote-in-wake-of-pepper-spray-incident/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 10:17 AM

25. Lawsuits? There should be arrests!

 

That was a disgusting display.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Original post)

Sat Feb 25, 2012, 09:52 PM

30. Good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread