Recent Changes for "Police Misconduct Stories" - Davis Wikihttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_StoriesRecent Changes of the page "Police Misconduct Stories" on Davis Wiki.en-us Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2013-03-12 16:49:39MeggoWafflesomeone (maybe a Vanguard reader?) please help update recent misconduct. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 71: </td> <td> Line 71: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ November 18, 2011 ["UC Davis Students Pepper-Sprayed" UC Davis Police pepper spray peaceful protesters]<br> + ----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2010-06-08 10:15:55JabberWokkyRevert to version 185 (JW reverting SW's deletion. ;)). <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- deleted</span> </td> <td> <span>+ This is a page to leave stories of alleged and factual racial profiling, police agressiveness, misconduct, and unconstitutional rights violations on ["UC Davis Police Department" campus] and in the ["Davis Police Department" City]. The flip side of this page can be found at ["Police Appreciation Stories"].<br> + [http://www.aclunc.org/publications.html For a full report on racial profiling in California] (["ACLU"])<br> + <br> + [http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], According to the data presented, blacks and Latinos were arrested at significantly higher rates than whites during the first seven and a half months of 2005. From Jan. 1 to Aug. 19, Latinos accounted for 20.5 percent of all arrests in Davis, while comprising roughly 10 percent of the population. During the same period, blacks accounted for 9.2 percent of arrests, while comprising about 2.4 percent of the population.<br> + <br> + Are those arrested necessarily citizens of Davis? After that question is answered, what is the average for black/latino arrests relative to their population? Answering that question would tell us how much above or below Davis is in terms of this.<br> + <br> + [[TableOfContents]]<br> + <br> + = Racial Profiling Stories =<br> + <br> + March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. However, a witness to the accident took down the license plate, which matched the Buzayan family vehicle, gave a description of a teenage driver that matched Halema, and picked Halema out of a photo-line up. Regardless of fault, the police continued to pursue criminal charges against Halema after it had been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story].<br> + <br> + -----<br> + November, 2005: An African-American couple alleges racial profiling and discrimination by Davis police. Ivy Anderson and David Johnson file a civil rights lawsuit, citing cameras set up around their home recording over 500 incidents of Davis PD driving by their home, shining lights, etc, but making no arrests.<br> + -----<br> + November, 2004; Senior Richmond Darko, a 20-year-old born in Ghana, wants an explanation why police stopped him on his way to a computer lab to search his backpack and ask what he was doing on campus."You were in the wrong place at the wrong time," Darko recalled an officer telling him. ''The Davis Enterprise Archives &amp;#8220;Racism at root of police complaint&amp;#8221; By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer Published: October 15, 2004''<br> + -----<br> + October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said.<br> + <br> + It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place their hands on their guns or holsters for various reasons. Officers are trained to do this in unassessed situations as it can greatly assist in response time in a situation where either lethal force or the threat of lethal force is necessary. Some believe the posture may be used as a method of intimidation and question how often it is done when questioning minorities versus similar situations with non-minorities.<br> + <br> + ''I get asked similar questions everytime i am stopped including have you ever been arrested, do you have any warrants, where do you live. It should be noted that in every stop police verify all your information with NCIC and know the answers to all these questions already, they are simply asking to testyour honesty for whatever reason not necessarily to demean you. In the above case there was probably someone who matched the description of the person stopped that the police were actively looking for.''<br> + <br> + ''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives: Racism at root of police complaint]'' by Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer (October 15, 2004).<br> + <br> + -----<br> + Exact date unknown, Fall 2004: Frederick Clarke, a second-year African-American graduate student in computer science at UCD, said police officers stopped him and his roommate while in the process of getting their bicycles."One of the [police officers] was nasty in his approach to the whole thing," Clarke said. "One made a comment about having an Uzi in my pocket." ''UCD grad student files complaint against campus police&amp;#8221; by Katy Tang Posted 10/18/2004, California Aggie''<br> + <br> + ''i think i know this cop, i was stopped by him because i matched the description of someone who they were looking for and while he was searching me he asked if i had and weapons in my pockets such as grenades, rocket launchers etc. its a joke, at least in my case i don't think theres anything wrong with that''<br> + -----<br> + = Misconduct =<br> + May 18, 2009:<br> + Please read the UC Davis Police misconduct complaint that I sent to the UCD Police Chief. I hope that my concerns will be noted. I cannot believe that regular citizens are being treated this way.<br> + <br> + Sir/Madame,<br> + On May 18th 2009 around 10pm, I was stopped by a police car at A street and Hutchinson Dr vicinity in Davis California. I was driving a 1995 white mercury tracer, belonging to my daughter. I had just dropped of my daughter, who is a student at UC Davis, and was looking to make my way back to Hwy 80 for Sacramento. I got lost around the place mentioned above and called my daughter for directions. At that time I saw the blinking lights of the patrol car behind me. When I was pulled over I did use a cell phone and understood that I was in violation.<br> + When the officer approached my vehicle from the right and knocked on the window, I opened the right side door. Due to the darkness in the car and the officer’s flashlight that was shining in my eyes, I could barely make out the officers’ profile due to his position at the right back door. He told me that I was in violation for 3 codes: 1. Cell phone use while driving. 2. Tail light failure.(checking afterwards, revealed no tail light problem) 3. License plate light failure. He said that he will write me only one ticket for the cell phone violation and dismiss the other ones. He asked for license, registration and proof of insurance. I provide my license (wallet) very quickly but had trouble finding the registration and proof of insurance (glove compartment) as the car was dark and the flashlight of the officer was constantly pointed at my face. I found the registration and the insurance paper and gave it to the officer. (Due to the darkness I must have given the officer the expired insurance paper instead of the current one.) The officer went back to his vehicle and I waited in the car. This allowed me time to go over all the facts and then I remembered that my drivers’ license has my previous address. I wanted to inform the officer of this fact as such that the correspondence of this traffic violation would not be sent to the wrong address. I opened the door and waved at the officer to get his attention. After a few seconds the responds was aggressive and loud: “Get back in the car and close the door!”. I got back in the car and waited. Finally the officer came back and stood again on my right barely visible. He told me that my insurance document was expired and said he was giving me a ticket. I told him that there was insurance on the car and that the document must be in the glove compartment. He told me that I had already ample time to find it. (this is not correct because I was only informed of this a few second before) I started looking for the current insurance documents on the seat next to me when he loudly shouted at me to stop it or he would take me to jail right there. I just sat silently in my car and waited for this to pass. The last time I was approached with such immediate verbal aggressiveness was during infantry basic training 26 years ago. He stretched to let me sign the violation report and walked off.<br> + I fully understand and respect the authority of a police officer and I will pay the fine without reservation, however this random humiliation at the hands of this police officer has altered the image I had of a Police departments’ ability to serve and protect.<br> + My complaint does not question the validity of the traffic violation nor does it question enforcement of the law. My complaint does question the capability of the officer to correctly read the situation in front of him and his overall poor job performance. The officer was rude, inpatient, threatening with total disregard of civil acceptable behavior. This behavior might be warranted in gang infested neighborhoods but not towards every day civilians being stopped for a traffic violation. I feel humiliated, frustrated and worried that my daughter might be approached the same way during her college time UC Davis.--["Users/ConcernedParent"]<br> + -----<br> + August 26th, 2006: "Whatever Rights You Think You Have You Don't".....this line was said to two UCD student leaders, ["Chris Herold"], former chair of the ASUCD ["Business and Finance Commission"] and ["Eric Zamora"], former Student Assistant to the Chancellor as well as myself, ["James Schwab"] ASUCD director of External Affairs. Furthermore, we have all sat on the City-Student Liaison Commission.<br> + <br> + Who said this line? A Davis Police officer.<br> + <br> + This evening at 12:45am an officer responded to a noise complaint for our going away party for friend. Eric and Chris answered the door. They were not residents of the house, so the officer requested to speak with a resident. As a resident was being fetched, Eric closed the door slightly. The officer put his foot in the door and said he cannot shut the door. The officer continued and said that "whatever rights you think you have you don't". Once a resident came to the door, the resident, Eric, Chris and officer talked outside. I was not a part of this coversation, but Eric and Chris told me the officer's tone was very threatening. They both used audio recorders to tape the conversation.<br> + <br> + I am extremely offended that a public servant in the City of Davis confronts its citizenry in this manner. There was absolutely no reason for the officer to take a threatening manner; Eric and Chris were both polite and cordial- they have both worked consistently with leadership from the University as well as the City police departments. Second, for a police officer not to believe in a citizen's rights is disturbing. I never thought I would hear such language used by an officer who has sworn to uphold the law.<br> + <br> + I do not know the name of the officer, only that he drove one of the white, unmarked vehicles on Friday-Saturday August 25th-26th.<br> + <br> + I plan on filing a formal complaint, as this behavior should not be tolerated by citizens or fellow officers.<br> + *Doesn't it seem a bit irregular, perhaps unfair, to shunt this over to the "talk" page, when there are many other lengthy discussions on this page?--["Users/CameronMenezes"]<br> + <br> + -----<br> + June 17th, 2005: Police accidently rough up an autistic 17 year old in Slide Hill Park after receiving a report that he attempted to lure a young girl into the car. [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/06/17/news/197new0.txt read the Davis Enterprise story.]<br> + -----<br> + April 16th, 2005: A police [http://www.livejournal.com/community/ucdavis/2093976.html misconduct story] was sighted on the UCD ["LiveJournal"], about overactive police during ["Picnic Day"].<br> + <br> + -----<br> + June 2004:Police Pepper spray individuals at a party. Also, police arrest couple in alleged domestic dispute. Both incidents are detailed in [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2004/06/02/FrontPage/Students.Police.Stories.Differ-1317742.shtml this California Aggie article].<br> + -----<br> + April 24th, 2004: ''I'm not sure if this should be classified as police misconduct, or just really fucked up, so feel free to correct me if needed.'' Me and five other friends were coming back from a ["DPS"] formal and had a stupid idea to go see the ["llamas"] over by the Veterinary Medicince Center on ["campus"]. After driving slowly by the llamas, getting our fill for the night, we were on our way out. Then, from out of nowhere, a cop car appears and pulls us over. All of us were completely sober, and the driver had been following the traffic laws, so we all were dumbfounded as to why the cop pulled us over. The cop asked our driver why he had run the stop sign 10 feet behind us, but the odd thing is none of us could remember seeing a stop sign and didn't know what the cop was talking about. We all had to get out of the car, still in our formal clothes and show him our student ID's, and were each badgered about why were doing there, where we were earlier that night, etc. Eventually they let us go, but before they did the cop added casually, "Oh, and don't worry, you didn't run a stop sign, we're pulling over all the cars through this area because we're looking for ELF and/or ALF demonstrators... heightened security for Earth Week, you know... and you guys just don't fit the profile." Though they let us all go without incident, I found the whole incident a little weird, and was sure glad I was in my formal clothes and didn't "fit the profile".<br> + -----<br> + March 5th, 2004 - A friend of mine from an aerobic walking class confided in me that she was going to have to leave the country to protect herself and her kids from her allegedly abusive ex husband. I never met the ex-husband and didn't even know my friend that well at the time, so I had no reason to take sides there - but as soon as she left, the police inevitably came after her for violating the custody order. Now there are laws there that they have to enforce, I understand that and don't blame them for contacting me for info (which I didn't have, she didn't tell me where she was going). But investigator Rick Gore from the Yolo County's DA Office, who they sent to interview me, made several sexist comments, for example saying that if she were to call me, then he would want me to let him know first so that they could tap the phone, but that I shouldn't worry or get embarrassed since he wouldn't pay attention or gossip if we started to talk about boys or something. Also he told me that they had to find her because she couldn't survive on her own in a foreign country, what would she do once she got her period and got cramps and couldn't even go to the public health hospital? I felt so awkward having to talk about cramps with a male investigator, and I got the sense that he thought my friend and I were like young children or junior high girls. --CristinaDeptula<br> + -----<br> + September 1989, A black lawyer is allegedly beaten by Davis police according to a group of witnesses who saw the incident. The investigation into the four officers accused of the beating is kept private by the City. Sacramento Bee on September 15, 1989, Page B1 and September 14, 1989, Page B1<br> + -----<br> + December 20th, 1989 The Yolo County district attorney's office prosecuted, William Caldwell, a black man for resisting arrest in an incident outside a community theater, even though the city of Davis that the charges be dropped. The arrest in September of 1998 of Caldwell who was an amateur actor and recent graduate of the University of California, Davis, School of Law, prompted public protest and criticism of police tactics. Sacramento Bee, December 20, 1989, Page B2,<br> + = Civil Rights Violations =<br> + <br> + April, 2004: Sterling Apartment pre-Picnic Day party. Anonymous UC Davis football player is shot in the eye with a police pepper spray projectile. (basically a paintball gun that shoots pellets filled with a mixture of cayenne pepper and water) The student was on his balcony in Sterling Apartments, during the Sterling riots. Police are trained to avoid shooting the pepper projectile guns at peoples' heads, otherwise the guns MAY become [http://www.policeone.com/pdfs/bostonglobe.pdf lethal]. The student became blind in the eye he was hit in, and lost his sports scholarship. A lawsuit he filed is still pending.<br> + *What was the student doing when he was shot? He was obviously not leaving the area. Why did this student remain at the party after being given lawful orders to disperse (leave the area)? I know for a fact that officers gave orders to disperse MULTIPLE times before firing any pepper projectiles. --CameronMenezes<br> + * The student was on the balcony of his third floor apartment looking down and whaat was happening. ["Users/JimSchwab"]<br> + *Officers gave orders for everyone to leave the area and return to their apartments/get off the apartment grounds. Officer did not know where, or who, was throwing the projectiles (at the police). A third-floor balcony with boozy people on it would scare me, as an officer, since those people could chuck anything right onto my head (if I were on the ground). In my opinion as a non-police officer, the people on that balcony were definitely an implicit, if not explicit, danger. Or should the cops have simply had blind faith in the goodness of the people on the balcony?--CameronMenezes<br> + * I actually agree with you on this one, they should just shoot everyone on every balcony. ["Users/JimSchwab"]<br> + *Jim! We've finally agreed! But remember- only if the person refuses to leave that balcony after repeated, and lawful, orders from the police. :) July 20th... I'll write that down so that you and I can send congratulatory messages to each other on every anniversary of our first agreement. :)--CameronMenezes<br> + ----<br> + <br> + Can we have an examination of the increased police presence during Black Family Day (including the calling in of other local agencies: Yolo county, Woodland police)? Also, Look into the hesitation the police have of "too many" black people in davis, and the desire to have such events over before sun-down. The "early" closing of businesses and police turning people away from AMPM on such nights. --["Users/DavisWikiGnome"]<br> + *Don't know about the rest of the stuff, but how could the police have anything to do with businesses closing early? Police officers cannot tell businesses to close, unless, of course, the business is illegal! :) Black Family Day is a large event (with great food, I might add). Having other agencies on-call doesn't seem that unusual... just my $.02.--CameronMenezes<br> + *Actually, police can shut down businesses when they feel that there is imminent threat of civil unrest. In 2006, the July 4 fireworks display at ["Raley Field"] was shut down by police after about 15minutes because a couple started a brawl that began to involve bystanders. How imminent threat is determined is, I suppose, at the discretion of the police officers present and is likely colored by their personal beliefs. --["Users/AlphaDog"]<br> + *A-Dog, good point.--CameronMenezes<br> + *Should we then also investigate the large police presence during picnic day? -- DaveZavatson<br> + *Picnic day is entirely different, with a lot of alcohol and tons and tons of people. If you compared the amount of police per people present black families day certainly has more. (im not talking about rained out picnic days of course, but i would still guess the analogy holds) -["Users/MattHh"]<br> + <br> + = Addressing the Problem =<br> + <br> + It is important that we identify, clearly document, and generate awareness about injustices in our society, but it is also important that we move toward a solution to this problem.<br> + <br> + Solutions and things to keep in mind:<br> + <br> + * Encourage free discussion between parties.<br> + * Focus on bad aspects, but also identify and recognize good aspects. i.e. ["Police Appreciation Stories"] (they may be paid to do their jobs but we can also show our gratitude for their actions)<br> + * Push for good individuals to join the force, instead of pushing them out. (collateral damage from harsh criticism directed at the entire police as opposed to individual officers who commit the actions)<br> + * Generate and brainstorm new and innovative solutions in addition to identifying the problem.<br> + * Occasionally, a misunderstanding may result in police misconduct, or in police conduct that is misinterpreted as misconduct. Knowing ["How to survive police encounters" how to survive police encounters] may help one to avoid these misunderstandings.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2010-06-08 09:59:52JabberWokkyPage deleted (DonShoring the wiki (I verbed!)) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- This is a page to leave stories of alleged and factual racial profiling, police agressiveness, misconduct, and unconstitutional rights violations on ["UC Davis Police Department" campus] and in the ["Davis Police Department" City]. The flip side of this page can be found at ["Police Appreciation Stories"].<br> - [http://www.aclunc.org/publications.html For a full report on racial profiling in California] (["ACLU"])<br> - <br> - [http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], According to the data presented, blacks and Latinos were arrested at significantly higher rates than whites during the first seven and a half months of 2005. From Jan. 1 to Aug. 19, Latinos accounted for 20.5 percent of all arrests in Davis, while comprising roughly 10 percent of the population. During the same period, blacks accounted for 9.2 percent of arrests, while comprising about 2.4 percent of the population.<br> - <br> - Are those arrested necessarily citizens of Davis? After that question is answered, what is the average for black/latino arrests relative to their population? Answering that question would tell us how much above or below Davis is in terms of this.<br> - <br> - [[TableOfContents]]<br> - <br> - = Racial Profiling Stories =<br> - <br> - March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. However, a witness to the accident took down the license plate, which matched the Buzayan family vehicle, gave a description of a teenage driver that matched Halema, and picked Halema out of a photo-line up. Regardless of fault, the police continued to pursue criminal charges against Halema after it had been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story].<br> - <br> - -----<br> - November, 2005: An African-American couple alleges racial profiling and discrimination by Davis police. Ivy Anderson and David Johnson file a civil rights lawsuit, citing cameras set up around their home recording over 500 incidents of Davis PD driving by their home, shining lights, etc, but making no arrests.<br> - -----<br> - November, 2004; Senior Richmond Darko, a 20-year-old born in Ghana, wants an explanation why police stopped him on his way to a computer lab to search his backpack and ask what he was doing on campus."You were in the wrong place at the wrong time," Darko recalled an officer telling him. ''The Davis Enterprise Archives &amp;#8220;Racism at root of police complaint&amp;#8221; By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer Published: October 15, 2004''<br> - -----<br> - October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said.<br> - <br> - It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place their hands on their guns or holsters for various reasons. Officers are trained to do this in unassessed situations as it can greatly assist in response time in a situation where either lethal force or the threat of lethal force is necessary. Some believe the posture may be used as a method of intimidation and question how often it is done when questioning minorities versus similar situations with non-minorities.<br> - <br> - ''I get asked similar questions everytime i am stopped including have you ever been arrested, do you have any warrants, where do you live. It should be noted that in every stop police verify all your information with NCIC and know the answers to all these questions already, they are simply asking to testyour honesty for whatever reason not necessarily to demean you. In the above case there was probably someone who matched the description of the person stopped that the police were actively looking for.''<br> - <br> - ''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives: Racism at root of police complaint]'' by Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer (October 15, 2004).<br> - <br> - -----<br> - Exact date unknown, Fall 2004: Frederick Clarke, a second-year African-American graduate student in computer science at UCD, said police officers stopped him and his roommate while in the process of getting their bicycles."One of the [police officers] was nasty in his approach to the whole thing," Clarke said. "One made a comment about having an Uzi in my pocket." ''UCD grad student files complaint against campus police&amp;#8221; by Katy Tang Posted 10/18/2004, California Aggie''<br> - <br> - ''i think i know this cop, i was stopped by him because i matched the description of someone who they were looking for and while he was searching me he asked if i had and weapons in my pockets such as grenades, rocket launchers etc. its a joke, at least in my case i don't think theres anything wrong with that''<br> - -----<br> - = Misconduct =<br> - May 18, 2009:<br> - Please read the UC Davis Police misconduct complaint that I sent to the UCD Police Chief. I hope that my concerns will be noted. I cannot believe that regular citizens are being treated this way.<br> - <br> - Sir/Madame,<br> - On May 18th 2009 around 10pm, I was stopped by a police car at A street and Hutchinson Dr vicinity in Davis California. I was driving a 1995 white mercury tracer, belonging to my daughter. I had just dropped of my daughter, who is a student at UC Davis, and was looking to make my way back to Hwy 80 for Sacramento. I got lost around the place mentioned above and called my daughter for directions. At that time I saw the blinking lights of the patrol car behind me. When I was pulled over I did use a cell phone and understood that I was in violation.<br> - When the officer approached my vehicle from the right and knocked on the window, I opened the right side door. Due to the darkness in the car and the officer’s flashlight that was shining in my eyes, I could barely make out the officers’ profile due to his position at the right back door. He told me that I was in violation for 3 codes: 1. Cell phone use while driving. 2. Tail light failure.(checking afterwards, revealed no tail light problem) 3. License plate light failure. He said that he will write me only one ticket for the cell phone violation and dismiss the other ones. He asked for license, registration and proof of insurance. I provide my license (wallet) very quickly but had trouble finding the registration and proof of insurance (glove compartment) as the car was dark and the flashlight of the officer was constantly pointed at my face. I found the registration and the insurance paper and gave it to the officer. (Due to the darkness I must have given the officer the expired insurance paper instead of the current one.) The officer went back to his vehicle and I waited in the car. This allowed me time to go over all the facts and then I remembered that my drivers’ license has my previous address. I wanted to inform the officer of this fact as such that the correspondence of this traffic violation would not be sent to the wrong address. I opened the door and waved at the officer to get his attention. After a few seconds the responds was aggressive and loud: “Get back in the car and close the door!”. I got back in the car and waited. Finally the officer came back and stood again on my right barely visible. He told me that my insurance document was expired and said he was giving me a ticket. I told him that there was insurance on the car and that the document must be in the glove compartment. He told me that I had already ample time to find it. (this is not correct because I was only informed of this a few second before) I started looking for the current insurance documents on the seat next to me when he loudly shouted at me to stop it or he would take me to jail right there. I just sat silently in my car and waited for this to pass. The last time I was approached with such immediate verbal aggressiveness was during infantry basic training 26 years ago. He stretched to let me sign the violation report and walked off.<br> - I fully understand and respect the authority of a police officer and I will pay the fine without reservation, however this random humiliation at the hands of this police officer has altered the image I had of a Police departments’ ability to serve and protect.<br> - My complaint does not question the validity of the traffic violation nor does it question enforcement of the law. My complaint does question the capability of the officer to correctly read the situation in front of him and his overall poor job performance. The officer was rude, inpatient, threatening with total disregard of civil acceptable behavior. This behavior might be warranted in gang infested neighborhoods but not towards every day civilians being stopped for a traffic violation. I feel humiliated, frustrated and worried that my daughter might be approached the same way during her college time UC Davis.--["Users/ConcernedParent"]<br> - -----<br> - August 26th, 2006: "Whatever Rights You Think You Have You Don't".....this line was said to two UCD student leaders, ["Chris Herold"], former chair of the ASUCD ["Business and Finance Commission"] and ["Eric Zamora"], former Student Assistant to the Chancellor as well as myself, ["James Schwab"] ASUCD director of External Affairs. Furthermore, we have all sat on the City-Student Liaison Commission.<br> - <br> - Who said this line? A Davis Police officer.<br> - <br> - This evening at 12:45am an officer responded to a noise complaint for our going away party for friend. Eric and Chris answered the door. They were not residents of the house, so the officer requested to speak with a resident. As a resident was being fetched, Eric closed the door slightly. The officer put his foot in the door and said he cannot shut the door. The officer continued and said that "whatever rights you think you have you don't". Once a resident came to the door, the resident, Eric, Chris and officer talked outside. I was not a part of this coversation, but Eric and Chris told me the officer's tone was very threatening. They both used audio recorders to tape the conversation.<br> - <br> - I am extremely offended that a public servant in the City of Davis confronts its citizenry in this manner. There was absolutely no reason for the officer to take a threatening manner; Eric and Chris were both polite and cordial- they have both worked consistently with leadership from the University as well as the City police departments. Second, for a police officer not to believe in a citizen's rights is disturbing. I never thought I would hear such language used by an officer who has sworn to uphold the law.<br> - <br> - I do not know the name of the officer, only that he drove one of the white, unmarked vehicles on Friday-Saturday August 25th-26th.<br> - <br> - I plan on filing a formal complaint, as this behavior should not be tolerated by citizens or fellow officers.<br> - *Doesn't it seem a bit irregular, perhaps unfair, to shunt this over to the "talk" page, when there are many other lengthy discussions on this page?--["Users/CameronMenezes"]<br> - <br> - -----<br> - June 17th, 2005: Police accidently rough up an autistic 17 year old in Slide Hill Park after receiving a report that he attempted to lure a young girl into the car. [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/06/17/news/197new0.txt read the Davis Enterprise story.]<br> - -----<br> - April 16th, 2005: A police [http://www.livejournal.com/community/ucdavis/2093976.html misconduct story] was sighted on the UCD ["LiveJournal"], about overactive police during ["Picnic Day"].<br> - <br> - -----<br> - June 2004:Police Pepper spray individuals at a party. Also, police arrest couple in alleged domestic dispute. Both incidents are detailed in [http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2004/06/02/FrontPage/Students.Police.Stories.Differ-1317742.shtml this California Aggie article].<br> - -----<br> - April 24th, 2004: ''I'm not sure if this should be classified as police misconduct, or just really fucked up, so feel free to correct me if needed.'' Me and five other friends were coming back from a ["DPS"] formal and had a stupid idea to go see the ["llamas"] over by the Veterinary Medicince Center on ["campus"]. After driving slowly by the llamas, getting our fill for the night, we were on our way out. Then, from out of nowhere, a cop car appears and pulls us over. All of us were completely sober, and the driver had been following the traffic laws, so we all were dumbfounded as to why the cop pulled us over. The cop asked our driver why he had run the stop sign 10 feet behind us, but the odd thing is none of us could remember seeing a stop sign and didn't know what the cop was talking about. We all had to get out of the car, still in our formal clothes and show him our student ID's, and were each badgered about why were doing there, where we were earlier that night, etc. Eventually they let us go, but before they did the cop added casually, "Oh, and don't worry, you didn't run a stop sign, we're pulling over all the cars through this area because we're looking for ELF and/or ALF demonstrators... heightened security for Earth Week, you know... and you guys just don't fit the profile." Though they let us all go without incident, I found the whole incident a little weird, and was sure glad I was in my formal clothes and didn't "fit the profile".<br> - -----<br> - March 5th, 2004 - A friend of mine from an aerobic walking class confided in me that she was going to have to leave the country to protect herself and her kids from her allegedly abusive ex husband. I never met the ex-husband and didn't even know my friend that well at the time, so I had no reason to take sides there - but as soon as she left, the police inevitably came after her for violating the custody order. Now there are laws there that they have to enforce, I understand that and don't blame them for contacting me for info (which I didn't have, she didn't tell me where she was going). But investigator Rick Gore from the Yolo County's DA Office, who they sent to interview me, made several sexist comments, for example saying that if she were to call me, then he would want me to let him know first so that they could tap the phone, but that I shouldn't worry or get embarrassed since he wouldn't pay attention or gossip if we started to talk about boys or something. Also he told me that they had to find her because she couldn't survive on her own in a foreign country, what would she do once she got her period and got cramps and couldn't even go to the public health hospital? I felt so awkward having to talk about cramps with a male investigator, and I got the sense that he thought my friend and I were like young children or junior high girls. --CristinaDeptula<br> - -----<br> - September 1989, A black lawyer is allegedly beaten by Davis police according to a group of witnesses who saw the incident. The investigation into the four officers accused of the beating is kept private by the City. Sacramento Bee on September 15, 1989, Page B1 and September 14, 1989, Page B1<br> - -----<br> - December 20th, 1989 The Yolo County district attorney's office prosecuted, William Caldwell, a black man for resisting arrest in an incident outside a community theater, even though the city of Davis that the charges be dropped. The arrest in September of 1998 of Caldwell who was an amateur actor and recent graduate of the University of California, Davis, School of Law, prompted public protest and criticism of police tactics. Sacramento Bee, December 20, 1989, Page B2,<br> - = Civil Rights Violations =<br> - <br> - April, 2004: Sterling Apartment pre-Picnic Day party. Anonymous UC Davis football player is shot in the eye with a police pepper spray projectile. (basically a paintball gun that shoots pellets filled with a mixture of cayenne pepper and water) The student was on his balcony in Sterling Apartments, during the Sterling riots. Police are trained to avoid shooting the pepper projectile guns at peoples' heads, otherwise the guns MAY become [http://www.policeone.com/pdfs/bostonglobe.pdf lethal]. The student became blind in the eye he was hit in, and lost his sports scholarship. A lawsuit he filed is still pending.<br> - *What was the student doing when he was shot? He was obviously not leaving the area. Why did this student remain at the party after being given lawful orders to disperse (leave the area)? I know for a fact that officers gave orders to disperse MULTIPLE times before firing any pepper projectiles. --CameronMenezes<br> - * The student was on the balcony of his third floor apartment looking down and whaat was happening. ["Users/JimSchwab"]<br> - *Officers gave orders for everyone to leave the area and return to their apartments/get off the apartment grounds. Officer did not know where, or who, was throwing the projectiles (at the police). A third-floor balcony with boozy people on it would scare me, as an officer, since those people could chuck anything right onto my head (if I were on the ground). In my opinion as a non-police officer, the people on that balcony were definitely an implicit, if not explicit, danger. Or should the cops have simply had blind faith in the goodness of the people on the balcony?--CameronMenezes<br> - * I actually agree with you on this one, they should just shoot everyone on every balcony. ["Users/JimSchwab"]<br> - *Jim! We've finally agreed! But remember- only if the person refuses to leave that balcony after repeated, and lawful, orders from the police. :) July 20th... I'll write that down so that you and I can send congratulatory messages to each other on every anniversary of our first agreement. :)--CameronMenezes<br> - ----<br> - <br> - Can we have an examination of the increased police presence during Black Family Day (including the calling in of other local agencies: Yolo county, Woodland police)? Also, Look into the hesitation the police have of "too many" black people in davis, and the desire to have such events over before sun-down. The "early" closing of businesses and police turning people away from AMPM on such nights. --["Users/DavisWikiGnome"]<br> - *Don't know about the rest of the stuff, but how could the police have anything to do with businesses closing early? Police officers cannot tell businesses to close, unless, of course, the business is illegal! :) Black Family Day is a large event (with great food, I might add). Having other agencies on-call doesn't seem that unusual... just my $.02.--CameronMenezes<br> - *Actually, police can shut down businesses when they feel that there is imminent threat of civil unrest. In 2006, the July 4 fireworks display at ["Raley Field"] was shut down by police after about 15minutes because a couple started a brawl that began to involve bystanders. How imminent threat is determined is, I suppose, at the discretion of the police officers present and is likely colored by their personal beliefs. --["Users/AlphaDog"]<br> - *A-Dog, good point.--CameronMenezes<br> - *Should we then also investigate the large police presence during picnic day? -- DaveZavatson<br> - *Picnic day is entirely different, with a lot of alcohol and tons and tons of people. If you compared the amount of police per people present black families day certainly has more. (im not talking about rained out picnic days of course, but i would still guess the analogy holds) -["Users/MattHh"]<br> - <br> - = Addressing the Problem =<br> - <br> - It is important that we identify, clearly document, and generate awareness about injustices in our society, but it is also important that we move toward a solution to this problem.<br> - <br> - Solutions and things to keep in mind:<br> - <br> - * Encourage free discussion between parties.<br> - * Focus on bad aspects, but also identify and recognize good aspects. i.e. ["Police Appreciation Stories"] (they may be paid to do their jobs but we can also show our gratitude for their actions)<br> - * Push for good individuals to join the force, instead of pushing them out. (collateral damage from harsh criticism directed at the entire police as opposed to individual officers who commit the actions)<br> - * Generate and brainstorm new and innovative solutions in addition to identifying the problem.<br> - * Occasionally, a misunderstanding may result in police misconduct, or in police conduct that is misinterpreted as misconduct. Knowing ["How to survive police encounters" how to survive police encounters] may help one to avoid these misunderstandings.</span> </td> <td> <span>+ deleted</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2010-01-16 21:56:00IdealParadigm(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *Just an FYI- it is perfectly legal for police to "enter" this type of situation, even though this wiki entry implies otherwise...--CameronMenezes</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2009-06-15 01:19:56robinlaughlinMoved to "Misconduct" section <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Please read the UC Davis Police misconduct complaint that I sent to the UCD Police Chief. I hope that my concerns will be noted.<br> - I cannot believe that regular citizens are being treated this way.<br> - <br> - Sir/Madame,<br> - On May 18th 2009 around 10pm, I was stopped by a police car at A street and Hutchinson Dr vicinity in Davis California. I was driving a 1995 white mercury tracer, belonging to my daughter. I had just dropped of my daughter, who is a student at UC Davis, and was looking to make my way back to Hwy 80 for Sacramento. I got lost around the place mentioned above and called my daughter for directions. At that time I saw the blinking lights of the patrol car behind me. When I was pulled over I did use a cell phone and understood that I was in violation.<br> - When the officer approached my vehicle from the right and knocked on the window, I opened the right side door. Due to the darkness in the car and the officer’s flashlight that was shining in my eyes, I could barely make out the officers’ profile due to his position at the right back door. He told me that I was in violation for 3 codes: 1. Cell phone use while driving. 2. Tail light failure.(checking afterwards, revealed no tail light problem) 3. License plate light failure. He said that he will write me only one ticket for the cell phone violation and dismiss the other ones. He asked for license, registration and proof of insurance. I provide my license (wallet) very quickly but had trouble finding the registration and proof of insurance (glove compartment) as the car was dark and the flashlight of the officer was constantly pointed at my face. I found the registration and the insurance paper and gave it to the officer. (Due to the darkness I must have given the officer the expired insurance paper instead of the current one.) The officer went back to his vehicle and I waited in the car. This allowed me time to go over all the facts and then I remembered that my drivers’ license has my previous address. I wanted to inform the officer of this fact as such that the correspondence of this traffic violation would not be sent to the wrong address. I opened the door and waved at the officer to get his attention. After a few seconds the responds was aggressive and loud: “Get back in the car and close the door!”. I got back in the car and waited. Finally the officer came back and stood again on my right barely visible. He told me that my insurance document was expired and said he was giving me a ticket. I told him that there was insurance on the car and that the document must be in the glove compartment. He told me that I had already ample time to find it. (this is not correct because I was only informed of this a few second before) I started looking for the current insurance documents on the seat next to me when he loudly shouted at me to stop it or he would take me to jail right there. I just sat silently in my car and waited for this to pass. The last time I was approached with such immediate verbal aggressiveness was during infantry basic training 26 years ago. He stretched to let me sign the violation report and walked off.<br> - I fully understand and respect the authority of a police officer and I will pay the fine without reservation, however this random humiliation at the hands of this police officer has altered the image I had of a Police departments’ ability to serve and protect.<br> - My complaint does not question the validity of the traffic violation nor does it question enforcement of the law. My complaint does question the capability of the officer to correctly read the situation in front of him and his overall poor job performance. The officer was rude, inpatient, threatening with total disregard of civil acceptable behavior. This behavior might be warranted in gang infested neighborhoods but not towards every day civilians being stopped for a traffic violation. I feel humiliated, frustrated and worried that my daughter might be approached the same way during her college time UC Davis.<br> - <br> - <br> - <br> - <br> - <br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 33: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ May 18, 2009:<br> + Please read the UC Davis Police misconduct complaint that I sent to the UCD Police Chief. I hope that my concerns will be noted. I cannot believe that regular citizens are being treated this way.<br> + <br> + Sir/Madame,<br> + On May 18th 2009 around 10pm, I was stopped by a police car at A street and Hutchinson Dr vicinity in Davis California. I was driving a 1995 white mercury tracer, belonging to my daughter. I had just dropped of my daughter, who is a student at UC Davis, and was looking to make my way back to Hwy 80 for Sacramento. I got lost around the place mentioned above and called my daughter for directions. At that time I saw the blinking lights of the patrol car behind me. When I was pulled over I did use a cell phone and understood that I was in violation.<br> + When the officer approached my vehicle from the right and knocked on the window, I opened the right side door. Due to the darkness in the car and the officer’s flashlight that was shining in my eyes, I could barely make out the officers’ profile due to his position at the right back door. He told me that I was in violation for 3 codes: 1. Cell phone use while driving. 2. Tail light failure.(checking afterwards, revealed no tail light problem) 3. License plate light failure. He said that he will write me only one ticket for the cell phone violation and dismiss the other ones. He asked for license, registration and proof of insurance. I provide my license (wallet) very quickly but had trouble finding the registration and proof of insurance (glove compartment) as the car was dark and the flashlight of the officer was constantly pointed at my face. I found the registration and the insurance paper and gave it to the officer. (Due to the darkness I must have given the officer the expired insurance paper instead of the current one.) The officer went back to his vehicle and I waited in the car. This allowed me time to go over all the facts and then I remembered that my drivers’ license has my previous address. I wanted to inform the officer of this fact as such that the correspondence of this traffic violation would not be sent to the wrong address. I opened the door and waved at the officer to get his attention. After a few seconds the responds was aggressive and loud: “Get back in the car and close the door!”. I got back in the car and waited. Finally the officer came back and stood again on my right barely visible. He told me that my insurance document was expired and said he was giving me a ticket. I told him that there was insurance on the car and that the document must be in the glove compartment. He told me that I had already ample time to find it. (this is not correct because I was only informed of this a few second before) I started looking for the current insurance documents on the seat next to me when he loudly shouted at me to stop it or he would take me to jail right there. I just sat silently in my car and waited for this to pass. The last time I was approached with such immediate verbal aggressiveness was during infantry basic training 26 years ago. He stretched to let me sign the violation report and walked off.<br> + I fully understand and respect the authority of a police officer and I will pay the fine without reservation, however this random humiliation at the hands of this police officer has altered the image I had of a Police departments’ ability to serve and protect.<br> + My complaint does not question the validity of the traffic violation nor does it question enforcement of the law. My complaint does question the capability of the officer to correctly read the situation in front of him and his overall poor job performance. The officer was rude, inpatient, threatening with total disregard of civil acceptable behavior. This behavior might be warranted in gang infested neighborhoods but not towards every day civilians being stopped for a traffic violation. I feel humiliated, frustrated and worried that my daughter might be approached the same way during her college time UC Davis.--["Users/ConcernedParent"]<br> + -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2009-06-14 22:42:52Concernedparent <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Please read the UC Davis Police misconduct complaint that I sent to the UCD Police Chief. I hope that my concerns will be noted.<br> + I cannot believe that regular citizens are being treated this way.<br> + <br> + Sir/Madame,<br> + On May 18th 2009 around 10pm, I was stopped by a police car at A street and Hutchinson Dr vicinity in Davis California. I was driving a 1995 white mercury tracer, belonging to my daughter. I had just dropped of my daughter, who is a student at UC Davis, and was looking to make my way back to Hwy 80 for Sacramento. I got lost around the place mentioned above and called my daughter for directions. At that time I saw the blinking lights of the patrol car behind me. When I was pulled over I did use a cell phone and understood that I was in violation.<br> + When the officer approached my vehicle from the right and knocked on the window, I opened the right side door. Due to the darkness in the car and the officer’s flashlight that was shining in my eyes, I could barely make out the officers’ profile due to his position at the right back door. He told me that I was in violation for 3 codes: 1. Cell phone use while driving. 2. Tail light failure.(checking afterwards, revealed no tail light problem) 3. License plate light failure. He said that he will write me only one ticket for the cell phone violation and dismiss the other ones. He asked for license, registration and proof of insurance. I provide my license (wallet) very quickly but had trouble finding the registration and proof of insurance (glove compartment) as the car was dark and the flashlight of the officer was constantly pointed at my face. I found the registration and the insurance paper and gave it to the officer. (Due to the darkness I must have given the officer the expired insurance paper instead of the current one.) The officer went back to his vehicle and I waited in the car. This allowed me time to go over all the facts and then I remembered that my drivers’ license has my previous address. I wanted to inform the officer of this fact as such that the correspondence of this traffic violation would not be sent to the wrong address. I opened the door and waved at the officer to get his attention. After a few seconds the responds was aggressive and loud: “Get back in the car and close the door!”. I got back in the car and waited. Finally the officer came back and stood again on my right barely visible. He told me that my insurance document was expired and said he was giving me a ticket. I told him that there was insurance on the car and that the document must be in the glove compartment. He told me that I had already ample time to find it. (this is not correct because I was only informed of this a few second before) I started looking for the current insurance documents on the seat next to me when he loudly shouted at me to stop it or he would take me to jail right there. I just sat silently in my car and waited for this to pass. The last time I was approached with such immediate verbal aggressiveness was during infantry basic training 26 years ago. He stretched to let me sign the violation report and walked off.<br> + I fully understand and respect the authority of a police officer and I will pay the fine without reservation, however this random humiliation at the hands of this police officer has altered the image I had of a Police departments’ ability to serve and protect.<br> + My complaint does not question the validity of the traffic violation nor does it question enforcement of the law. My complaint does question the capability of the officer to correctly read the situation in front of him and his overall poor job performance. The officer was rude, inpatient, threatening with total disregard of civil acceptable behavior. This behavior might be warranted in gang infested neighborhoods but not towards every day civilians being stopped for a traffic violation. I feel humiliated, frustrated and worried that my daughter might be approached the same way during her college time UC Davis.<br> + <br> + <br> + <br> + <br> + <br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2008-08-30 18:25:18JasonAllerlink fixes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 44: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *Doesn't it seem a bit irregular, perhaps unfair, to shunt this over to the "talk" page, when there are many other lengthy discussions on this page?--["CameronMenezes"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> *Doesn't it seem a bit irregular, perhaps unfair, to shunt this over to the "talk" page, when there are many other lengthy discussions on this page?--["<span>Users/</span>CameronMenezes"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 65: </td> <td> Line 65: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The student was on the balcony of his third floor apartment looking down and whaat was happening. ["JimSchwab"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The student was on the balcony of his third floor apartment looking down and whaat was happening. ["<span>Users/</span>JimSchwab"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 67: </td> <td> Line 67: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * I actually agree with you on this one, they should just shoot everyone on every balcony. ["JimSchwab"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * I actually agree with you on this one, they should just shoot everyone on every balcony. ["<span>Users/</span>JimSchwab"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 71: </td> <td> Line 71: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Can we have an examination of the increased police presence during Black Family Day (including the calling in of other local agencies: Yolo county, Woodland police)? Also, Look into the hesitation the police have of "too many" black people in davis, and the desire to have such events over before sun-down. The "early" closing of businesses and police turning people away from AMPM on such nights. --["DavisWikiGnome"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Can we have an examination of the increased police presence during Black Family Day (including the calling in of other local agencies: Yolo county, Woodland police)? Also, Look into the hesitation the police have of "too many" black people in davis, and the desire to have such events over before sun-down. The "early" closing of businesses and police turning people away from AMPM on such nights. --["<span>Users/</span>DavisWikiGnome"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 73: </td> <td> Line 73: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *Actually, police can shut down businesses when they feel that there is imminent threat of civil unrest. In 2006, the July 4 fireworks display at ["Raley Field"] was shut down by police after about 15minutes because a couple started a brawl that began to involve bystanders. How imminent threat is determined is, I suppose, at the discretion of the police officers present and is likely colored by their personal beliefs. --["AlphaDog"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> *Actually, police can shut down businesses when they feel that there is imminent threat of civil unrest. In 2006, the July 4 fireworks display at ["Raley Field"] was shut down by police after about 15minutes because a couple started a brawl that began to involve bystanders. How imminent threat is determined is, I suppose, at the discretion of the police officers present and is likely colored by their personal beliefs. --["<span>Users/</span>AlphaDog"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 76: </td> <td> Line 76: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *Picnic day is entirely different, with a lot of alcohol and tons and tons of people. If you compared the amount of police per people present black families day certainly has more. (im not talking about rained out picnic days of course, but i would still guess the analogy holds) -["MattHh"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> *Picnic day is entirely different, with a lot of alcohol and tons and tons of people. If you compared the amount of police per people present black families day certainly has more. (im not talking about rained out picnic days of course, but i would still guess the analogy holds) -["<span>Users/</span>MattHh"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2008-06-02 00:32:47AmyHartstein <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 37: </td> <td> Line 37: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> This evening at 12:45am an officer responded to a noise complaint for our going away party for friend. Eric and Chris answered the door. They were not residents of the house, so the officer requested to speak with a resident. As a resident was being fetched, Eric closed the door slightly. The officer put his foot in the door and said he cannot shut the door. The officer continued and said that "whatever rights you think you have you don't". Once a residentcame to the door, the resident, Eric, Chris and officer talked outside. I was not a part of this coversation, but Eric and Chris told me the officer's tone was very threatening. They both used audio recorders to tape the conversation. </td> <td> <span>+</span> This evening at 12:45am an officer responded to a noise complaint for our going away party for friend. Eric and Chris answered the door. They were not residents of the house, so the officer requested to speak with a resident. As a resident was being fetched, Eric closed the door slightly. The officer put his foot in the door and said he cannot shut the door. The officer continued and said that "whatever rights you think you have you don't". Once a resident<span>&nbsp;</span>came to the door, the resident, Eric, Chris and officer talked outside. I was not a part of this coversation, but Eric and Chris told me the officer's tone was very threatening. They both used audio recorders to tape the conversation. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 39: </td> <td> Line 39: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- I am extremely offended that a public servant in the City of Davis confronts its citizenry in this manner. There was absolutely no reason for the officer to take a threatening manner, Eric and Chris were both polite and cordial- they have both worked consistently with leadership from the Universit as well as the City police departments. Second, for a peace officer not to believe in a citizen's rights is disturbing. I never thought I would here such language used by an officer who has sworn to uphold the law.</span> </td> <td> <span>+ I am extremely offended that a public servant in the City of Davis confronts its citizenry in this manner. There was absolutely no reason for the officer to take a threatening manner; Eric and Chris were both polite and cordial- they have both worked consistently with leadership from the University as well as the City police departments. Second, for a police officer not to believe in a citizen's rights is disturbing. I never thought I would hear such language used by an officer who has sworn to uphold the law.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-12-02 21:36:02JamesSchwabper request of Dean <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 50: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- -----<br> - August 4th, 2004: Criminal defense attorney Dean Johansson is pulled over by an officer. When asked for the reason for the stop, the officer responded that it was an "investigative" stop. As this is not a legal reason for a pull over, Mr. Johansson asked for a real reason- speeding, running stop sign. The officer said he did not have to give him a reason and asked for his license and registration. As an officer needs probable cause of a crime to pull over a vehicle, Mr. Johansson informed the officer he would not give him his license until given a legitmate legal reason. The officer then called in a "Code 3" emergency. Four other patrols cars arrive, officers exit the vehicle with guns drawn. After a lengthy discussion between the officer and his sergeant, they tell Mr Johansson he was pulled over for speeding. Mr Johansson then hands them his license and registration and is subsequently given a ticket.<br> - * It is funny that a criminal defense attorney didn't know this, but you are required to give your identification information during any stop even if the officer had no probable cause to briefly restrict your freedom of movement during a routine traffic stop. While the actions of the police officer may have been unnecessary, any individual is required to show identification during any routine traffic stop and nothing more. --["RobertBaron"]<br> - * Based on what I'm familiar with, I'd disagree. This is highlighted best in ''BROWN v. TEXAS''. 1979. 443 U.S. 47, where a motorist is pulled over and asked to identify himself for "being a person not usually seen in the area." The US Supreme Court found “In the absence of any basis for suspecting appellant of misconduct, the balance between the public interest and appellant's right to personal security and privacy tilts in favor of freedom from police interference” (52); and that basically the police need to have some kind of reason to ask for identification. Also related, in ''City of Indianapolis v. Edmond''. 2000. 531. U.S. 32 The United States Supreme Court found that random police checkpoints on streets for "generic crime interdiction" are unconstitutional. Basically, from my understanding of the relevant case law, no you are not under any obligation to identify yourself if the police have no reasonable excuse to enquire -- but of course they could very easily bullshit one, so don't get too saucy. -["KrisFricke"]<br> - * Based on what cops tell me you don't have the right to refuse a police order. You basically do what the police officer tells you to do even if it is evasive. That said, it is most probable that the crime you may or may not have committed would be thrown out, the officer would be disciplined for his or her actions, and you would be free to sue a whole lot of people. I would cite Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada to back the comments I have had received from police officers. I wouldn't recommend refusing to give your name to the police in order to take a tour through the legal system. Steven Ostrowski<br> - * You have to obey direct lawful orders, but it was a bad stop. Cops can't pull people over for no reason, but they can easily spin one up. --["StevenDaubert"] P.S code 3 probably should be code 33, which is what they call whenever they have someone at gunpoint etc. A beeper sounds ever couple seconds and only officers who called the code and dispatch should talk.<br> - * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probable cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors. --DaveZavatson<br> - *Dean Johansson's claim was dismissed at his request. See the press release (3/22/2006) that is posted on the City of Davis website at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/story/?story=CaseDismissed - ["SharlaDaly"]<br> - * It's funny that a Yolo County Court found the exact opposite. The court threw out the speeding ticket issued by the officer because they believed the actions the officer accused Mr Johansson of were impossible using scientific evidence. I would trust a court's investigation over the City's investiagtion any day, especially the way the Mayor "feels comfortable" about how the DPD handle the Halema case(see above).["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 60: </td> <td> Line 51: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- A few facts about this case are important. First, the judge in the traffic case (who does not normally handle traffic cases) decided that she was qualified to make calculations of the ability of the officer to bumper pace Johansson on Parkside. However, she did not feel it necessary to determine the actual length of Parkside when she made those calculations. She did this math based on guestimates of witnesses at the hearing that Parkside was 200 feet long on a side. In fact, it is approximately 536 feet on a side (see City of Davis GIS maps) and consequently is more than adequately long for a bumper pace. So her decision was based on rather dramatic misinformation and therefore a miscalcuation of what was or wasn't possible (see the transcript of the hearing). The scientific evidence absolving the officer is the same simple math but based on accurate information. If only all the opinions expressed about this and other cases involving the police department were based on facts. - NatKarst</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-10-28 14:49:18uglyfreak <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''I get asked similar questions everytime i am stopped including have you ever been arrested, do you have any warrants, where do you live. It should be noted that in every stop police verify all your information with NCIC and know the answers to all these questions already, they are simply asking to testyour honesty for whatever reason not necessarily to demean you. In the above case there was probably someone who matched the description of the person stopped that the police were actively looking for.''<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 27: </td> <td> Line 29: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + ''i think i know this cop, i was stopped by him because i matched the description of someone who they were looking for and while he was searching me he asked if i had and weapons in my pockets such as grenades, rocket launchers etc. its a joke, at least in my case i don't think theres anything wrong with that''</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-08-08 11:44:03TomSlankardadded link to surviving police encounters <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 94: </td> <td> Line 94: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Occasionally, a misunderstanding may result in police misconduct, or in police conduct that is misinterpreted as misconduct. Knowing ["How to survive police encounters" how to survive police encounters] may help one to avoid these misunderstandings.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-06-15 19:09:00JasonAllerHey WilliamLewis... if you delete a page fix the broken links! <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 94: </td> <td> Line 94: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - <br> - -----<br> - ''(Debate about the content of this page has been taking place at ["Police Misconduct Stories/Talk"]).''<br> - rg</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-06-05 09:04:44MattHhcomment on black families day vs. picnic day <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 82: </td> <td> Line 82: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Picnic day is entirely different, with a lot of alcohol and tons and tons of people. If you compared the amount of police per people present black families day certainly has more. (im not talking about rained out picnic days of course, but i would still guess the analogy holds) -["MattHh"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-06-05 00:31:05DaveZavatsonfixed silly typo <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 52: </td> <td> Line 52: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probabl<span>y</span> cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors. --DaveZavatson </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probabl<span>e</span> cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors. --DaveZavatson </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-02-12 02:42:47BrentLaabseliminating some pointless threadmode <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 42: </td> <td> Line 42: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * This is simply a way to hide the conversation away in order to imply that there isn't any opposition to the statement. In due time when all the facts are out this section will be filled up regardless of who was in the wrong. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - <br> - * Oh, I see! Thank you for clarifying that, I was confused. It's funny how citizens who are being rude to their neighbors, to the point that the neighbors feel obligated to call 911, actually have the audacity to opine about what types of behavior should be tolerated. Honestly. For people who are so worried about your right to be treated fairly by the police, you think you'd also be concerned with your neighbors' right to SLEEP PEACEFULLY AT NIGHT! :)--["CameronMenezes"]<br> - * In all seriousness, the police officer spoke inappropriately. This is obvious. Whether the neighbors could sleep or not is irrelevant. Of course, I'm assuming that James' story is absolutely true, as no one has disputed it yet.<br> - Now, Cameron and Steve,, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't believe the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't."<br> - So let's be realistic. An officer made a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes at their jobs. Let's help that officer prevent future mistakes by letting him know that he made an error instead of denying that there's a problem.<br> - -["PaulHarms"]<br> - Oh, and P.S., If anything I said above is wrong, please let me know. I'd love to hear your logic :)<br> - *No, Paul, I think your logic is sound. If the officer did, in fact, say that, then he could have chosen a better phrase. What you said is fair 'nuff, in my opinion. But whether or not the neighbors could sleep is quite relevant... the neighbors were the reason the officer showed up in the first place. By the given account, it sounds as though the door being shut is what caused the officer to make that statement. Heat of the moment... sometimes things may pop out that don't sound too great on paper (or on wiki!)--["CameronMenezes"]<br> - * I think the issue will eventually be about whether to make a really big deal out of this, like hearings at the city council, special interests groups protesting about, and what ASUCD may do concerning this event. You guys couldn't just let a lame comment go by, you go ahead and file a complaint with the police over a comment that wouldn't have been said if the door hadn't been closed, and if the noise level hadn't been so loud. If a cop comes up to me and says "you don't have the right" to drive while drunk then that would not be a threat or even rude, it would be a fact. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-29 14:14:23DaveZavatson <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 62: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probably cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors. </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probably cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors.<span>&nbsp;--DaveZavatson</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-29 14:13:47DaveZavatson <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 62: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * The term 'investigative stop' is a bit misleading. I am not really sure what is meant by that. But the police can stop and detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you have been involved in criminal activity. You do not need probably cause. Probable cause is a higher standard and is required to make an arrest, not to detain someone. This reasonable suspicion need not be articulated to the person being detained. With all that in mind, if you are stopped and ask the officer why you are stopped and are not satisfied with the answer, then that doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful stop. You will most likely not be in possession of all the facts when you are being detained. If you want to come to the determination on your own, without all the relevant facts, that it is an illegal detention and base your response on this, then you risk taking a detention to an arrest for not cooperating. Some laws violated could be 31 CVC, 148 PC, 12951(b) CVC, all misdemeanors.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-26 18:46:13StevenDaubert <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 61: </td> <td> Line 61: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * You have to obey direct lawful orders, but it was a bad stop. Cops can't pull people over for no reason, but they can easily spin one up. --["StevenDaubert"] P.S code 3 probably should be code 33, which is what they call whenever they have someone at gunpoint etc. A beeper sounds ever couple seconds and only officers who called the code and dispatch should talk.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-26 15:18:52DaveZavatson <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 89: </td> <td> Line 89: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Should we then also investigate the large police presence during picnic day? -- DaveZavatson</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-26 14:59:24DaveZavatson <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. However, a witness to the accident took down the license plate, which matched the Buzayan family vehicle, gave a description of a <span>16 year old</span> driver that matched Halema, and picked Halema out of a photo-line up. Regardless of fault, the police continued to pursue criminal charges against Halema after it had been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story]. </td> <td> <span>+</span> March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. However, a witness to the accident took down the license plate, which matched the Buzayan family vehicle, gave a description of a <span>teenage</span> driver that matched Halema, and picked Halema out of a photo-line up. Regardless of fault, the police continued to pursue criminal charges against Halema after it had been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story]. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2007-01-26 14:58:32DaveZavatsonChanged the Halema stories to be less biased. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. Regardless of fault, the police <span>entered the situation</span> after it had<span>&nbsp;already</span> been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story]. </td> <td> <span>+</span> March, 2006: The Davis police are facing an upcoming civil rights suit after initiating an investigation and arresting ["Halema Buzayan"], a high school student, for allegedly bumping into and denting another car in the Cowell Blvd. Safeway parking lot. Buzayan denies that she was driving at the time and her father showed photos to KGO news personnel which he claims demonstrate that it could not have been the Buzayans' car that made the dent. <span>However, a witness to the accident took down the license plate, which matched the Buzayan family vehicle, gave a description of a 16 year old driver that matched Halema, and picked Halema out of a photo-line up. </span>Regardless of fault, the police <span>continued to pursue criminal charges against Halema</span> after it had been settled civilly between the two parties. The victim criticised the police investigation on KGO news: "For them to prosecute something like this - this is a bumper bender in a parking lot - really makes me question where the priorities are." [http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&amp;id=4000500 abc story]. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-28 00:34:29SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 51: </td> <td> Line 51: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * I think the issue will eventually be about whether to make a really big deal out of this, like hearings at the city council, special interests groups protesting about, and what ASUCD may do concerning this event. You guys couldn't just let a lame comment go by, you go ahead and file a complaint with the police over a comment that wouldn't have been said if the door hadn't been closed, and if the noise level hadn't been so loud. If a cop comes up to me and says "you don't have the right" to drive while drunk then that would not be a threat or even rude, it would be a fact. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-27 20:37:35CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 46: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - <br> - </span> Now, Cameron and Steve,, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't believe the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't."<br> <span>- <br> - <br> - </span> So let's be realistic. An officer made a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes at their jobs. Let's help that officer prevent future mistakes by letting him know that he made an error instead of denying that there's a problem. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Now, Cameron and Steve,, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't believe the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't."<br> <span>+</span> So let's be realistic. An officer made a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes at their jobs. Let's help that officer prevent future mistakes by letting him know that he made an error instead of denying that there's a problem. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *No, Paul, I think your logic is sound. If the officer did, in fact, say that, then he could have chosen a better phrase. What you said is fair 'nuff.--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ *No, Paul, I think your logic is sound. If the officer did, in fact, say that, then he could have chosen a better phrase. What you said is fair 'nuff, in my opinion. But whether or not the neighbors could sleep is quite relevant... the neighbors were the reason the officer showed up in the first place. By the given account, it sounds as though the door being shut is what caused the officer to make that statement. Heat of the moment... sometimes things may pop out that don't sound too great on paper (or on wiki!)--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-27 20:25:27CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 54: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *No, Paul, I think your logic is sound. If the officer did, in fact, say that, then he could have chosen a better phrase. What you said is fair 'nuff.--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-27 19:22:32PaulHarms+$0.02 <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 48: </td> <td> Line 48: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Now, Cameron, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't <span>think</span> the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't." </td> <td> <span>+</span> Now, Cameron<span>&nbsp;and Steve,</span>, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't <span>believe</span> the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't." </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 53: </td> <td> Line 53: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Oh, and P.S., If anything I said above is wrong, please let me know. I'd love to hear your logic :)</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-27 19:19:14PaulHarmsmy humble $0.02 <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 45: </td> <td> Line 45: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * In all seriousness, the police officer spoke inappropriately. This is obvious. Whether the neighbors could sleep or not is irrelevant. Of course, I'm assuming that James' story is absolutely true, as no one has disputed it yet.<br> + <br> + <br> + Now, Cameron, I don't think it's audacious of ''me'' to opine that this behaviour should not be tolerated. I'm not rude to my neighbors. My family isn't rude to my neighbors. My friends aren't rude to my neighbors. In addition, my neighbors tell me that they sleep very well at night, and I'd be concerned if I wasn't letting them sleep. However, even if I were a deadbeat, drunken, drug-dealing delinquent (and I'm not implying that anyone who answered the door at that party is), I don't think the police would have the right to tell me "Whatever Rights You Think You Have, You Don't."<br> + <br> + <br> + So let's be realistic. An officer made a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes at their jobs. Let's help that officer prevent future mistakes by letting him know that he made an error instead of denying that there's a problem.<br> + -["PaulHarms"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 21:57:19EricWu+ Police Appreciation Stories link <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 90: </td> <td> Line 90: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Focus on bad aspects, but also identify and recognize good aspects. (they may be paid to do their jobs but we can also show our gratitude for their actions) </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Focus on bad aspects, but also identify and recognize good aspects.<span>&nbsp;i.e. ["Police Appreciation Stories"]</span> (they may be paid to do their jobs but we can also show our gratitude for their actions) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 21:55:57EricWucap <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 92: </td> <td> Line 92: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * <span>g</span>enerate and brainstorm new and innovative solutions in addition to identifying the problem. </td> <td> <span>+</span> * <span>G</span>enerate and brainstorm new and innovative solutions in addition to identifying the problem. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 21:54:54EricWu+ addressing the problem <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 83: </td> <td> Line 83: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ = Addressing the Problem =<br> + <br> + It is important that we identify, clearly document, and generate awareness about injustices in our society, but it is also important that we move toward a solution to this problem.<br> + <br> + Solutions and things to keep in mind:<br> + <br> + * Encourage free discussion between parties.<br> + * Focus on bad aspects, but also identify and recognize good aspects. (they may be paid to do their jobs but we can also show our gratitude for their actions)<br> + * Push for good individuals to join the force, instead of pushing them out. (collateral damage from harsh criticism directed at the entire police as opposed to individual officers who commit the actions)<br> + * generate and brainstorm new and innovative solutions in addition to identifying the problem.<br> + <br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:56:10CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 44: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Oh, I see! Thank you for clarifying that, I was confused. It's funny how citizens who are being rude to their neighbors, to the point that the neighbors feel obligated to call 911, actually have the audacity to opine about what types of behavior should be tolerated. Honestly. For people who are so <span>damned worried about your rights to fair treatment by the big</span>, <span>bad police, </span>you think you'd also be concerned with <span>the personal happiness and welfare of your neighbors.</span>--["CameronMenezes"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Oh, I see! Thank you for clarifying that, I was confused. It's funny how citizens who are being rude to their neighbors, to the point that the neighbors feel obligated to call 911, actually have the audacity to opine about what types of behavior should be tolerated. Honestly. For people who are so <span>worried about your right to be treated fairly by the police</span>, you think you'd also be concerned with <span>your neighbors' right to SLEEP PEACEFULLY AT NIGHT! :)</span>--["CameronMenezes"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:45:12CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 43: </td> <td> Line 43: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * Oh, I see! Thank you for clarifying that, I was confused. It's funny how citizens who are being rude to their neighbors, to the point that the neighbors feel obligated to call 911, actually have the audacity to opine about what types of behavior should be tolerated. Honestly. For people who are so damned worried about your rights to fair treatment by the big, bad police, you think you'd also be concerned with the personal happiness and welfare of your neighbors.--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:34:19SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 41: </td> <td> Line 41: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * This is simply a way to hide the conversation away in order to imply that there isn't any opposition to the statement. In due time when all the facts are out this section will be filled up regardless of who was in the wrong. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:31:59CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 40: </td> <td> Line 40: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ *Doesn't it seem a bit irregular, perhaps unfair, to shunt this over to the "talk" page, when there are many other lengthy discussions on this page?--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:18:58JamesSchwabmoved discussion to talk page <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 31: </td> <td> Line 31: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *Nice to see you attach all of your ASUCD titles to your names as if the officer would know your faces on sight. I find it a little interesting that you all can have noisy parties and if a cop ever tells you to stop it you can go complain to the city. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 42: </td> <td> Line 40: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *Perhaps a poor choice of words on the officer's part, but no, you cannot shut the door in the officer's face. At that point, the officer could very well have taken Eric into custody. You may think you have a prima facie case, James, but really, I think that your righteous indignation would best be applied in some other way. Did the officer actually tell you: "James Schwab, I, a Davis Police Officer, do not believe in the rights of citizens of the city of Davis?" No. It sounds like he was referring to Eric shutting the door in his face. The officer is correct in that case- once contact has been established, Eric does NOT have the right to shut the door in the officer's face. It doesn't matter that Eric was not the resident of the house/apartment. And remember- the only reason the officer stopped at your party is because your party was loud and you bothered your neighbors. --["CameronMenezes"]<br> - <br> - <br> - *The statement by the officer "Whatever rights you think you have you don't" means just what it says. It's typical police arrogance. A police officer has the right to enter a private residence once the door has been opened? (I'm assuming the officer has no warrant.) You're kidding, right? The reason the officer stopped at the party was not because it was loud; the officer stopped because a neighbor alleged that the sound ordinance was being violated. Mr/Ms Menezes, why do you go to such extremes to be an apologist for the Davis PD? Is it your opinion that they can do no wrong? ["PaulThober"]<br> - <br> - * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half-way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JimSchwab"]<br> - <br> - * The officer did not need to speak to the person at the door and a resident was being fetched. There was no reason to have the door open while the resident was being fetched and every reason for it not to be. Keeping the door closed or nearly closed smartly limits the officer's ability to legally enter the house on the plain sight exception. It's called covering your butt. --["WilliamLewis"]<br> - <br> - *Under the "Frequently asked questions of the police" revised February 6, 2006 it could be considered obstruction of justice to close the door on the police officer. Furthermore, how is the officer supposed to know that the actual resident of the place is actually on his way? I would like to know more details about the case, like were people outside, was the officer alone outside, and why may I ask would someone feel the need to close the door on the officer. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - <br> - <br> - *Also according to the ordinance those responsible for the noise can also be busted so it wouldn't have matter if the resident was there or not, if a person causes the noise violation they could be cited. By closing the door you're kind of obstructing the officer's ability to do that, increasing your likely hood of being fined, and irritating the officer. There really is no reason to close the door on the officer unless you are hiding something within the building. Might I ask what the end all result was? --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - <br> - * Completely irrelevant why they want to close the door. Why do you care why? The officer can't enter without a warrant, or he sees something that gives him reason. Closing the door is maintaining your privacy. Unless you're trying to say he's justified... And I doubt this is an "obstruction of justice". The officer was told the resident would be fetched, I doubt he can claim probable clause that once the door was closed everyone would scatter and hide and obstruct anything. That's an extremely loose and unlikely interpretation., and I really don't think it would hold anywhere if anyone tried to use it. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - *True, Edwin, it is irrelevant. But we are not dicussing the Constitutionality of door-closing, we are discussing the Davis Police Officer's right to continue his contact with Eric. It would have arguably been an obstruction of justice, had Eric closed the door while the officer was speaking with him. The officer had every right to maintain contact with Eric, and from what it sounds like, Eric was making a motion to close the door in the officer's face. How should the officer have known if Eric was planning on closing the door half-way or all the way? I think we are arguing about different things here.--["CameronMenezes"]<br> - <br> - * An obstruction of justice would be if they closed the door and did nothing, ie ignored the police. Simply closing a door is not an obstruction of justice. The police officer was told a resident would be fetched, he had no probable cause for assuming it wouldn't. But I don't know the laws that well, please if you do, show me where he has the right to continue contact with a non-resident, assuming Eric was not doing anything illegal at the time. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - <br> - * Eric could have stepped outside, closed the door and chatted with the officer and it would have been fine. But instead he attempted to close the door which would restrict the officer from any communication with the building and again there is no way for the officer to verify that the resident is comming over. Also the officer might want to cite Eric for all we know. May I ask further questions as to whether the noise in the building stopped upon Eric closing the door, if not, the officer can simply knock once more to get a hold of someone responsible for the noise. On the other side of the coin I think if Mr. Schwab went to the city council he would be totally dismissed and if he sends a report to the police that too will be dismissed. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * Eric is not a resident, why would he chat with the officer? He is not responsible for it. If the officer came for a noise violation, he needs a resident of the home. Closing the door is just protecting your right to privacy. Why would anyone keep the door open and risk getting in trouble for a possible infraction of the law? Like I said above, if there is some police right to continue contact with a nonresident in the event of a noise citation, please let me know.<br> - <br> - <br> - * The officer was using his discretion, and following common police practices, by continuing contact with Eric at the door until the owner/resident arrived. That discretion includes deciding whether or not he needs to speak with someone. In this case, that someone, unfortunately, was Eric. The officer was well within his rights in requesting that Eric stay nearby while the resident was being fetched. Jim, I'll grant that the officer's comment sounds very unsavory. But then again, Jim, this story is coming from you, and you are hardly unbiased when it comes to police stories. Wiki is only hearing one side of the story-yours. I consider that automatically suspect, as should anyone who has read your edits on wiki police pages. Paul T, an emergency number was called to report this party, and the police department had a duty and an obligation to investigate the possible violation. And Paul, how am I going to extremes? I am providing my opinion, sir. If you don't like what I write, then don't read my edits anymore! I have never claimed that the Davis Police Department is infallible. However, I DO think that many of the criticisms of the Davis P.D. on this and other wiki pages are ill-informed, misguided, and often, unfounded. Oh, and Paul- I am Mr. Menezes. --["CameronMenezes"]<br> - <br> - * It goes beyond 'unsavory', it sounds more like a threat meant to intimidate. An officer forces the door to be kept open while telling you you have less rights than you think. I expect you'll say it's not, but please. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - <br> - * I suppose a tape recording of the entire incident is in order, I doubt such a comment came out of a vacuum. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - <br> - *Edwin, quibbling over terms is one of the most "unsavory" ways of wasting time that I can think of. haha! Unsavory, threatening, who the hell knows? I wasn't there, and didn't hear the officer say this, so I don't know for sure what type of evil tone he used. haha. Were you there?--["CameronMenezes"]<br> - * No, it's not. There's a very large difference between them. But of course you'd minimize it =/.</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:17:53EdwinSaadareplies. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 59: </td> <td> Line 59: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * An obstruction of justice would be if they closed the door and did nothing, ie ignored the police. Simply closing a door is not an obstruction of justice. The police officer was told a resident would be fetched, he had no probable cause for assuming it wouldn't. But I don't know the laws that well, please if you do, show me where he has the right to continue contact with a non-resident, assuming Eric was not doing anything illegal at the time. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 60: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Eric is not a resident, why would he chat with the officer? He is not responsible for it. If the officer came for a noise violation, he needs a resident of the home. Closing the door is just protecting your right to privacy. Why would anyone keep the door open and risk getting in trouble for a possible infraction of the law? Like I said above, if there is some police right to continue contact with a nonresident in the event of a noise citation, please let me know.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 68: </td> <td> Line 72: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * No, it's not. There's a very large difference between them. But of course you'd minimize it =/.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:10:12SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 30: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *Nice to see you attach all of your ASUCD titles to your names as if the officer would know your faces on sight. I find it a little interesting that you all can have noisy parties and if a cop ever tells you to stop it you can go complain to the city. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:04:43SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Eric could have stepped outside, closed the door and chatted with the officer and it would have been fine. But instead he attempted to close the door which would restrict the officer from any communication with the building and again there is no way for the officer to verify that the resident is comming over. Also the officer might want to cite Eric for all we know. May I ask further questions as to whether the noise in the building stopped upon Eric closing the door, if not, the officer can simply knock once more to get a hold of someone responsible for the noise. On the other side of the coin I think if Mr. Schwab went to the city council he would be totally dismissed and if he sends a report to the police that too will be dismissed. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 60: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * I suppose a tape recording of the entire incident is in order, I doubt such a comment came out of a vacuum. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 61: </td> <td> Line 66: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 12:04:01CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 55: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *True, Edwin, it is irrelevant. But we are not dicussing the Constitutionality of door-closing, we are discussing the Davis Police Officer's right to continue his contact with Eric. It would have arguably been an obstruction of justice, had Eric closed the door while the officer was speaking with him. The officer had every right to maintain contact with Eric, and from what it sounds like, Eric was making a motion to close the door in the officer's face. How should the officer have known if Eric was planning on closing the door half-way or all the way? I think we are arguing about different things here.--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:58:05CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 59: </td> <td> Line 59: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Edwin, quibbling over terms is one of the most "unsavory" ways of wasting time that I can think of. haha! Unsavory, threatening, who the hell knows? I wasn't there, and didn't hear the officer say this, so I don't know for sure what type of evil tone he used. haha. Were you there?--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:49:05EdwinSaadareplies <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 54: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Completely irrelevant why they want to close the door. Why do you care why? The officer can't enter without a warrant, or he sees something that gives him reason. Closing the door is maintaining your privacy. Unless you're trying to say he's justified... And I doubt this is an "obstruction of justice". The officer was told the resident would be fetched, I doubt he can claim probable clause that once the door was closed everyone would scatter and hide and obstruct anything. That's an extremely loose and unlikely interpretation., and I really don't think it would hold anywhere if anyone tried to use it. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 55: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * It goes beyond 'unsavory', it sounds more like a threat meant to intimidate. An officer forces the door to be kept open while telling you you have less rights than you think. I expect you'll say it's not, but please. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:41:27SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 50: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + *Also according to the ordinance those responsible for the noise can also be busted so it wouldn't have matter if the resident was there or not, if a person causes the noise violation they could be cited. By closing the door you're kind of obstructing the officer's ability to do that, increasing your likely hood of being fined, and irritating the officer. There really is no reason to close the door on the officer unless you are hiding something within the building. Might I ask what the end all result was? --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 51: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:40:10CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 50: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * The officer was using his discretion, and following common police practices, by continuing contact with Eric at the door until the owner/resident arrived. That discretion includes deciding whether or not he needs to speak with someone. In this case, that someone, unfortunately, was Eric. The officer was well within his rights in requesting that Eric stay nearby while the resident was being fetched. Jim, I'll grant that the officer's comment sounds very unsavory. But then again, Jim, this story is coming from you, and you are hardly unbiased when it comes to police stories. Wiki is only hearing one side of the story-yours. I consider that automatically suspect, as should anyone who has read your edits on wiki police pages. Paul T, an emergency number was called to report this party, and the police department had a duty and an obligation to investigate the possible violation. And Paul, how am I going to extremes? I am providing my opinion, sir. If you don't like what I write, then don't read my edits anymore! I have never claimed that the Davis Police Department is infallible. However, I DO think that many of the criticisms of the Davis P.D. on this and other wiki pages are ill-informed, misguided, and often, unfounded. Oh, and Paul- I am Mr. Menezes. --["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:33:58SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 48: </td> <td> Line 48: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *Under the "Frequently asked questions of the police" revised February 6, 2006 it could be considered obstruction of justice to close the door on the police officer. Furthermore, how is the officer supposed to know that the actual resident of the place is actually on his way? I would like to know more details about the case, like were people outside, was the officer alone outside, and why may I ask would someone feel the need to close the door on the officer. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 11:10:10WilliamLewisComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 46: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * The officer did not need to speak to the person at the door and a resident was being fetched. There was no reason to have the door open while the resident was being fetched and every reason for it not to be. Keeping the door closed or nearly closed smartly limits the officer's ability to legally enter the house on the plain sight exception. It's called covering your butt. --["WilliamLewis"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:32:54JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 45: </td> <td> Line 45: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * Hence why I wrote, "responded to a noise complaint". ["JimSchwab"]<br> - * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half-way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JImSchwab"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half-way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:24:52PaulThober <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 41: </td> <td> Line 41: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half-way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JImSchwab"]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 43: </td> <td> Line 42: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *The statement by the officer "Whatever rights you think you have you don't" means just what it says. It's typical police arrogance.<span><br> - *</span>A police officer has the right to enter a private residence once the door has been opened? (I'm assuming the officer has no warrant.) You're kidding, right?<span><br> - *</span>The reason the officer stopped at the party was not because it was loud; the officer stopped because a neighbor alleged that the sound ordinance was being violated.<span><br> - ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> - *</span>Mr/Ms Menezes, why do you go to such extremes to be an apologist for the Davis PD? Is it your opinion that they can do no wrong? ["PaulThober"]<br> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span><br> <span>- </span> * Hence why I wrote, "responded to a noise complaint". ["JimSchwab"]<br> -<span>&nbsp;----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> +</span> *The statement by the officer "Whatever rights you think you have you don't" means just what it says. It's typical police arrogance.<span>&nbsp;</span>A police officer has the right to enter a private residence once the door has been opened? (I'm assuming the officer has no warrant.) You're kidding, right?<span>&nbsp;</span>The reason the officer stopped at the party was not because it was loud; the officer stopped because a neighbor alleged that the sound ordinance was being violated.<span>&nbsp;</span>Mr/Ms Menezes, why do you go to such extremes to be an apologist for the Davis PD? Is it your opinion that they can do no wrong? ["PaulThober"]<br> <span>+ </span><br> <span>+</span> * Hence why I wrote, "responded to a noise complaint". ["JimSchwab"]<br> <span>+ * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half</span>-<span>way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JImSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:17:55PaulThober <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 46: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> + *Mr/Ms Menezes, why do you go to such extremes to be an apologist for the Davis PD? Is it your opinion that they can do no wrong? ["PaulThober"]<br> + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:15:02JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p>No differences found!</div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:14:55JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 46: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Hence why I wrote, "responded to a noise complaint". ["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:12:45JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p>No differences found!</div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:12:38JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 41: </td> <td> Line 41: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Eric was not trying to "shut the door in the officer's face". The door was wide open and Eric closed it half way. How is it illegal to half-way shut a door? Furthermore, they were in a private residence. They were not being detained. The "crime in progress" was a loud noise. Where in the US Constitution does it say you do not have the right to shut the door? ["JImSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 45: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 10:09:03PaulThober <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 41: </td> <td> Line 41: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *The statement by the officer "Whatever rights you think you have you don't" means just what it says. It's typical police arrogance.<br> + *A police officer has the right to enter a private residence once the door has been opened? (I'm assuming the officer has no warrant.) You're kidding, right?<br> + *The reason the officer stopped at the party was not because it was loud; the officer stopped because a neighbor alleged that the sound ordinance was being violated.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 09:31:36CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 40: </td> <td> Line 40: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *Perhaps a poor choice of words on the officer's part, but no, you cannot shut the door in the officer's face. At that point, the officer could very well have taken Eric into custody. You may think you have a prima facie case, James, but really, I think that your righteous indignation would best be applied in some other way. Did the officer actually tell you: "James Schwab, I, a Davis Police Officer, do not believe in the rights of citizens of the city of Davis?" No.<span><br> -</span> It sounds like he was referring to Eric shutting the door in his face. The officer is correct in that case- once contact has been established, Eric does NOT have the right to shut the door in the officer's face. And remember- the only reason the officer <span>had to stop</span> at your party is because your party was loud and you bothered your neighbors.--["CameronMenezes"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> *Perhaps a poor choice of words on the officer's part, but no, you cannot shut the door in the officer's face. At that point, the officer could very well have taken Eric into custody. You may think you have a prima facie case, James, but really, I think that your righteous indignation would best be applied in some other way. Did the officer actually tell you: "James Schwab, I, a Davis Police Officer, do not believe in the rights of citizens of the city of Davis?" No.<span>&nbsp;</span> It sounds like he was referring to Eric shutting the door in his face. The officer is correct in that case- once contact has been established, Eric does NOT have the right to shut the door in the officer's face. <span>It doesn't matter that Eric was not the resident of the house/apartment. </span>And remember- the only reason the officer <span>stopped</span> at your party is because your party was loud and you bothered your neighbors.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>--["CameronMenezes"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 09:27:27CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 40: </td> <td> Line 40: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Perhaps a poor choice of words on the officer's part, but no, you cannot shut the door in the officer's face. At that point, the officer could very well have taken Eric into custody. You may think you have a prima facie case, James, but really, I think that your righteous indignation would best be applied in some other way. Did the officer actually tell you: "James Schwab, I, a Davis Police Officer, do not believe in the rights of citizens of the city of Davis?" No.<br> + It sounds like he was referring to Eric shutting the door in his face. The officer is correct in that case- once contact has been established, Eric does NOT have the right to shut the door in the officer's face. And remember- the only reason the officer had to stop at your party is because your party was loud and you bothered your neighbors.--["CameronMenezes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-08-26 02:14:10JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 29: </td> <td> Line 29: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ August 26th, 2006: "Whatever Rights You Think You Have You Don't".....this line was said to two UCD student leaders, ["Chris Herold"], former chair of the ASUCD ["Business and Finance Commission"] and ["Eric Zamora"], former Student Assistant to the Chancellor as well as myself, ["James Schwab"] ASUCD director of External Affairs. Furthermore, we have all sat on the City-Student Liaison Commission.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 31: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Who said this line? A Davis Police officer.<br> + <br> + This evening at 12:45am an officer responded to a noise complaint for our going away party for friend. Eric and Chris answered the door. They were not residents of the house, so the officer requested to speak with a resident. As a resident was being fetched, Eric closed the door slightly. The officer put his foot in the door and said he cannot shut the door. The officer continued and said that "whatever rights you think you have you don't". Once a residentcame to the door, the resident, Eric, Chris and officer talked outside. I was not a part of this coversation, but Eric and Chris told me the officer's tone was very threatening. They both used audio recorders to tape the conversation.<br> + <br> + I am extremely offended that a public servant in the City of Davis confronts its citizenry in this manner. There was absolutely no reason for the officer to take a threatening manner, Eric and Chris were both polite and cordial- they have both worked consistently with leadership from the Universit as well as the City police departments. Second, for a peace officer not to believe in a citizen's rights is disturbing. I never thought I would here such language used by an officer who has sworn to uphold the law.<br> + <br> + I do not know the name of the officer, only that he drove one of the white, unmarked vehicles on Friday-Saturday August 25th-26th.<br> + <br> + I plan on filing a formal complaint, as this behavior should not be tolerated by citizens or fellow officers.<br> + -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 17:41:44JabberWokkyRewrite for balance, combined "reply" and entry, comments? <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 19: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said.<span>&nbsp;''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives;Racism at root of police complaint]'' By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer Published: October 15, 2004</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * ''</span>It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place their hands on their guns or holsters for various reasons. <span>This</span> can greatly assist in po<span>lice respo</span>nse time in a situation where either lethal force<span>, or the threat of lethal force, is nec</span>cessary. <span>H</span>ow<span>e</span>ver<span>, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation method used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than</span> non-minorities.<span>''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span>It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place their hands on their guns or holsters for various reasons. <span>Officers are trained to do this in unassessed situations as it</span> can greatly assist in <span>res</span>ponse time in a situation where either lethal force<span>&nbsp;or the threat of lethal force is ne</span>cessary. <span>&nbsp;Some believe the posture may be used as a method of intimidation and question h</span>ow<span>&nbsp;often it is done when questioning minorities </span>ver<span>sus similar situations with</span> non-minorities. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives: Racism at root of police complaint]'' by Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer (October 15, 2004).</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:49:07DukeMcAdowAfter all that, you guys make me wanna sing "We Are The World" ;) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * ''It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place th<span>ier hands on thie</span>r guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. However, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation method used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than non-minorities.'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> * ''It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place th<span>eir hands on thei</span>r guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. However, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation method used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than non-minorities.'' </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:26:29CameronMenezeschanged "tactic" to "method", and man, I've gotta get myself a hamster, too!haha <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * ''It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. However, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation <span>tactic</span> used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than non-minorities.'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> * ''It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. However, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation <span>method</span> used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than non-minorities.'' </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:21:33EdwinSaadasimpler? short&amp;sweet. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation tactic used during questioning, and in the opinion of some happens more often to racial minorities than non-minorities.<br> - <br> - *Edwin, I think you are the fastest corrector of "edit conflicts" in Davis. haha, I was just working on that, and in a far less tidy manner than you. :) Yeah, what you wrote makes sense. I still don't like the wording of the statement, though. Could we perhaps change it to this: ''An officer putting his hand on his gun is also considered by some to be an intimidation tactic used during questioning, and some opine that this happens more often to racial minorities than non-minorities.'' I used the word "some" because this statement is not the opinion of everyone. If that is acceptable to you, I think we should delete the rest of this crap, let bygones be bygones, and clean up this page. What do you think?--CameronMenezes</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * ''It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. However, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation tactic used more often during the questioning of racial minorities than non-minorities.''</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:19:03EdwinSaadalike that? <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly used in greater prevalence against racial minorities.<br> - *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, exactly WHO considers it a fear and intimidation tactic? And how commonly is it cited? I want to see some links providing studies that show HOW OFTEN officers rest their hands on guns during contact with racial minorities. I want to see how common this is. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information. *As an aside, on my ride-alongs, I've seen officers rest their hands on their guns for vastly different groups of people, certainly not limited to minorities alone. Out of wild, random curiosity, Edwin- do you believe that most cops are racists? Your previous post certainly intimates this.--CameronMenezes<br> - * I don't have an "angle", but I disagree with sugar-coating everything. I find it funny you flat-out ignored me asking for proof of a single fact so many times, yet you seem to be asking for a masters thesis. Are you doing this jus to try to get back at me for what I asked of Steve? That is what it seems like. The difference between what Steve and I said: Steve said something happens as a fact that I know to be illegal. What I am saying probably opinion/subjective, but but it's naive to think it's not out there. But there is a factual basis to some of it. I mean, just look at the last 10 years of news reports. There are near weekly or monthly news stories about police brutality or racism or profiling or X somewhere in the country. No, I don't think most police are racist, but that's irrelevant here, and I do think it's ignorant to think that just because most cop's are perfect role models doesn't mean there are some that aren't or even engage in misconduct. The huge race riots weren't exactly that long ago, and a lot of that stuff was captured on tape (more than enough to show misconduct, yet the riots were caused due to the aquittals iirc, and that says a lot about the legal system). Likewise, there are a lot of studies and statistics showing inequalities in the legal system. African-Americans for example are more likely to be sent to prison for the same crime as a white person, or to death row, or to be sentenced in court, etc. It's why so many say racism is an underlying problem that many people don't want to believe. I believe that's also why Davis is tense about it. There seems to be a huge "yes there is" and "No there isnt" populations in this town, as seen just this last year with other cases such as the Buzayan one. Many of the stories on this page are an example. And there have been a lot of allegations, more than enough to get the city council and commisions involved and to spur the creation of whatever city-police oversight they ended up making or will make. That said, I think the way I worded the above sentence is still fair and has basis. I asked JW to do it earlier since he's better at this kind of thing. Maybe he can do it more to your liking. Otherwise, please feel free to suggest something yourself rather than throw what feels like a retaliation fit? -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - * I was wondering the same thing that Cameron was. --["DukeMcAdow"]<br> - * About whether I believe most cops are racist? I rewrote the above comment afterwards and I think I said no, I do not. I'm middle eastern and I've never had any problems with the police, nor do I ever expect to. I've been pulled over twice while driving, once when 17 and given a ticket, once two weeks ago and given a warning by a friendly cop (I suppose that could be appreciation). But I still think that just because 99.9% of cops are good doesn't mean the .1% can't be wrong. Like I said, the media is constantly full of this stuff, and Davis itself has been for a while too, enough for city politics to get involved. I havn't actually ever read this page til now, but I did feel the need to refute the statement I saw earlier. I kind of am regretting getting involved =/ lol -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - *note, this was a response to a comment that was rewritten/no longer on page:<br> - *haha, ok. Just as an FYI- you are a very witty writer, and I found myself laughing out loud while reading your comments. Look, the whole debate between you and Steve (that I dropped in on) was becoming pretty confusing. Your "use of force" link was impressive and is indeed THE RULE for police officers. You were asking me to refute that link somehow, but that was never my intention, because refutation is impossible. Rules are rules, and cops gotta follow 'em! '''From what I understand of you and Steve's disagreement, you maintain that (in a hypothetical situation) it is illegal for officer 1 to have his gun drawn and hidden, if officer 1 is watching officer 2 talk to a suspect, and officer 2's weapon is not drawn. Is that right? Well, based on that, I'd agree with you, Edwin!''' It's unusual for officer 1's gun to be out! However, what if officer 1 noticed something that officer 2 missed? Like a bulge on the suspect's ankle? All I'm saying is that all three of us can argue hypotheticals til the cows come home, '''but in the end, we ALL agree that an officer cannot draw his gun unless he feels that there is some kind of imminent and lethal danger, and need to use that gun.''' And again, I feel that we should delete this whole section or at least move it to the talk page. Even though I hate seeing stories that discredit cops, I much more hate seeing cluttered, confusing debates on an otherwise tidy wiki page.--CameronMenezes<br> - *By the way, I never IM'ed Steve... and I don't see how that is relevant... unless you are suggesting that Steve and I are somehow coordinating our responses on silly davis wiki? hahahaha!! Now that, Edwin, is funny. Joy. :)--CameronMenezes<br> - * Well, it wasn't a hypothetical so much as Steve saying they "sometimes" have the gun out. The way he said it seemed far more like he was making a factual statement than proposing a hypothetical situation. When I replied about the use of force laws, his response was not to agree as you did, but continue that he suspect can't see the gun so its ok because it can be..etc. The only reason I got into that arguement was he put that comment right under this case and it was factually wrong/illegal. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered by some to be an intimidation tactic used during questioning, and in the opinion of some happens more often to racial minorities than non-minorities.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:15:29CameronMenezesEdwin- what do you think? <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 30: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Edwin, I think you are the fastest corrector of "edit conflicts" in Davis. haha, I was just working on that, and in a far less tidy manner than you. :) Yeah, what you wrote makes sense. I still don't like the wording of the statement, though. Could we perhaps change it to this: ''An officer putting his hand on his gun is also considered by some to be an intimidation tactic used during questioning, and some opine that this happens more often to racial minorities than non-minorities.'' I used the word "some" because this statement is not the opinion of everyone. If that is acceptable to you, I think we should delete the rest of this crap, let bygones be bygones, and clean up this page. What do you think?--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:11:24EdwinSaadareply <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 25: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * About whether I believe most cops are racist? I rewrote the above comment afterwards and I think I said no, I do not. I'm middle eastern and I've never had any problems with the police, nor do I ever expect to. I've been pulled over twice while driving, once when 17 and given a ticket, once two weeks ago and given a warning by a friendly cop (I suppose that could be appreciation). But I still think that just because 99.9% of cops are good doesn't mean the .1% can't be wrong. Like I said, the media is constantly full of this stuff, and Davis itself has been for a while too, enough for city politics to get involved. I havn't actually ever read this page til now, but I did feel the need to refute the statement I saw earlier. I kind of am regretting getting involved =/ lol -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:06:19DukeMcAdow <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * I was wondering the same thing that Cameron was. --["DukeMcAdow"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 15:04:10EdwinSaadaremoving edit conflict. i was rewriting my response. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * I don't have an "angle", but I disagree with sugar-coating everything. I find it funny you flat-out ignored me asking for proof of a single fact so many times, yet you seem to be asking for a masters thesis. Are you doing this jus to try to get back at me for what I asked of Steve? That is what it seems like. The difference between what Steve and I said: Steve said something happens as a fact that I know to be illegal. What I am saying probably opinion/subjective, but but it's naive to think it's not out there. But there is a factual basis to some of it. I mean, just look at the last 10 years of news reports. There are near weekly or monthly news stories about police brutality or racism or profiling or X somewhere in the country. No, I don't think most police are racist, but that's irrelevant here, and I do think it's ignorant to think that just because most cop's are perfect role models doesn't mean there are some that aren't or even engage in misconduct. The huge race riots weren't exactly that long ago, and a lot of that stuff was captured on tape (more than enough to show misconduct, yet the riots were caused due to the aquittals iirc, and that says a lot about the legal system). Likewise, there are a lot of studies and statistics showing inequalities in the legal system. African-Americans for example are more likely to be sent to prison for the same crime as a white person, or to death row, or to be sentenced in court, etc. It's why so many say racism is an underlying problem that many people don't want to believe. I believe that's also why Davis is tense about it. There seems to be a huge "yes there is" and "No there isnt" populations in this town, as seen just this last year with other cases such as the Buzayan one. Many of the stories on this page are an example. And there have been a lot of allegations, more than enough to get the city council and commisions involved and to spur the creation of whatever city-police oversight they ended up making or will make. That said, I think the way I worded the above sentence is still fair and has basis. I asked JW to do it earlier since he's better at this kind of thing. Maybe he can do it more to your liking. Otherwise, please feel free to suggest something yourself rather than throw a retaliation fit? -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> - * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly cited as a technique used in greater prevalence against racial minorities.<br> - *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, exactly WHO considers it a fear and intimidation tactic? And how commonly is it cited? I want to see some links providing studies that show HOW OFTEN officers rest their hands on guns during contact with racial minorities. I want to see how common this is. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.--CameronMenezes<br> - *As an aside, on my ride-alongs, I've seen officers rest their hands on their guns for vastly different groups of people, certainly not limited to minorities alone. Out of wild, random curiosity, Edwin- do you believe that most cops are racists? Your previous post certainly intimates this.--CameronMenezes<br> - * Fine, I'll find some stuff for you later. It's not that hard to find studies supporting the idea that racism is a factor in some police cases, it's pretty darn easy. Or studies on intimidation and fear tactics - that's simple too. Why would anyone be intimidated to see an officer with a hand on thier gun? Who knows. Nice to see you want to play the game now I guess, though you do want to take it to a new level. Funny, actually, since all I wanted was for Steve to admit what he said is done is is illegal, glad you guys posted a link earlier too! Oh wait, you just deleted it all when you couldnt support it (that was your compromise), and that was a far simpler matter. lol what?? ''Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.''. That's funny as hell. I think I posted "please give validation or links to prove me wrong" in 900 seperate paragraphs. And that wasn't an opinion, that was fact and law/rules/policy. I quoted a use of force policy that prohibits it, period , while Steve is going on about how its ok , or as long as the suspect doesnt see the gun because it can be hidden by the door. And then you come in (did he ask you on AIM?) and say we're all saying the same thing, lol! Not lol my friend. I should just delete this whole page (bias, anti-police). Do you want me to show links proving that police response time and accuracy improves when they have thier hand near the gun, or is that pro-police enough that you don't question it? Matter of fact, we should investigate and try to debunk every case here and just go around asking anyone whos ever had a police do thier job (respond to a call, no misconduct?) and help out write an appreciation story. Glee. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - *haha, ok. Just as an FYI- you are a very witty writer, and I found myself laughing out loud while reading your comments. Look, the whole debate between you and Steve (that I dropped in on) was becoming pretty confusing. Your "use of force" link was impressive and is indeed THE RULE for police officers. You were asking me to refute that link somehow, but that was never my intention, because refutation is impossible. Rules are rules, and cops gotta follow 'em! '''From what I understand of you and Steve's disagreement, you maintain that (in a hypothetical situation) it is illegal for officer 1 to have his gun drawn and hidden, if officer 1 is watching officer 2 talk to a suspect, and officer 2's weapon is not drawn. Is that right? Well, based on that, I'd agree with you, Edwin!''' It's unusual for officer 1's gun to be out! However, what if officer 1 noticed something that officer 2 missed? Like a bulge on the suspect's ankle? All I'm saying is that all three of us can argue hypotheticals til the cows come home, '''but in the end, we ALL agree that an officer cannot draw his gun unless he feels that there is some kind of imminent and lethal danger, and need to use that gun.''' And again, I feel that we should delete this whole section or at least move it to the talk page. Even though I hate seeing stories that discredit cops, I much more hate seeing cluttered, confusing debates on an otherwise tidy wiki page.--CameronMenezes</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * I don't have an "angle", but I disagree with sugar-coating everything. I find it funny you flat-out ignored me asking for proof of a single fact so many times, yet you seem to be asking for a masters thesis. Are you doing this jus to try to get back at me for what I asked of Steve? That is what it seems like. The difference between what Steve and I said: Steve said something happens as a fact that I know to be illegal. What I am saying probably opinion/subjective, but but it's naive to think it's not out there. But there is a factual basis to some of it. I mean, just look at the last 10 years of news reports. There are near weekly or monthly news stories about police brutality or racism or profiling or X somewhere in the country. No, I don't think most police are racist, but that's irrelevant here, and I do think it's ignorant to think that just because most cop's are perfect role models doesn't mean there are some that aren't or even engage in misconduct. The huge race riots weren't exactly that long ago, and a lot of that stuff was captured on tape (more than enough to show misconduct, yet the riots were caused due to the aquittals iirc, and that says a lot about the legal system). Likewise, there are a lot of studies and statistics showing inequalities in the legal system. African-Americans for example are more likely to be sent to prison for the same crime as a white person, or to death row, or to be sentenced in court, etc. It's why so many say racism is an underlying problem that many people don't want to believe. I believe that's also why Davis is tense about it. There seems to be a huge "yes there is" and "No there isnt" populations in this town, as seen just this last year with other cases such as the Buzayan one. Many of the stories on this page are an example. And there have been a lot of allegations, more than enough to get the city council and commisions involved and to spur the creation of whatever city-police oversight they ended up making or will make. That said, I think the way I worded the above sentence is still fair and has basis. I asked JW to do it earlier since he's better at this kind of thing. Maybe he can do it more to your liking. Otherwise, please feel free to suggest something yourself rather than throw what feels like a retaliation fit? -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> + *note, this was a response to a comment that was rewritten/no longer on page:<br> + *haha, ok. Just as an FYI- you are a very witty writer, and I found myself laughing out loud while reading your comments. Look, the whole debate between you and Steve (that I dropped in on) was becoming pretty confusing. Your "use of force" link was impressive and is indeed THE RULE for police officers. You were asking me to refute that link somehow, but that was never my intention, because refutation is impossible. Rules are rules, and cops gotta follow 'em! '''From what I understand of you and Steve's disagreement, you maintain that (in a hypothetical situation) it is illegal for officer 1 to have his gun drawn and hidden, if officer 1 is watching officer 2 talk to a suspect, and officer 2's weapon is not drawn. Is that right? Well, based on that, I'd agree with you, Edwin!''' It's unusual for officer 1's gun to be out! However, what if officer 1 noticed something that officer 2 missed? Like a bulge on the suspect's ankle? All I'm saying is that all three of us can argue hypotheticals til the cows come home, '''but in the end, we ALL agree that an officer cannot draw his gun unless he feels that there is some kind of imminent and lethal danger, and need to use that gun.''' And again, I feel that we should delete this whole section or at least move it to the talk page. Even though I hate seeing stories that discredit cops, I much more hate seeing cluttered, confusing debates on an otherwise tidy wiki page.--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 31: </td> <td> Line 27: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Well, it wasn't a hypothetical so much as Steve saying they "sometimes" have the gun out. The way he said it seemed far more like he was making a factual statement than proposing a hypothetical situation. When I replied about the use of force laws, his response was not to agree as you did, but continue that he suspect can't see the gun so its ok because it can be..etc. The only reason I got into that arguement was he put that comment right under this case and it was factually wrong/illegal. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 32: </td> <td> Line 29: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:59:27EdwinSaadatoo hot in davis. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> + * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly used in greater prevalence against racial minorities.<br> + *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, exactly WHO considers it a fear and intimidation tactic? And how commonly is it cited? I want to see some links providing studies that show HOW OFTEN officers rest their hands on guns during contact with racial minorities. I want to see how common this is. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information. *As an aside, on my ride-alongs, I've seen officers rest their hands on their guns for vastly different groups of people, certainly not limited to minorities alone. Out of wild, random curiosity, Edwin- do you believe that most cops are racists? Your previous post certainly intimates this.--CameronMenezes<br> + * I don't have an "angle", but I disagree with sugar-coating everything. I find it funny you flat-out ignored me asking for proof of a single fact so many times, yet you seem to be asking for a masters thesis. Are you doing this jus to try to get back at me for what I asked of Steve? That is what it seems like. The difference between what Steve and I said: Steve said something happens as a fact that I know to be illegal. What I am saying probably opinion/subjective, but but it's naive to think it's not out there. But there is a factual basis to some of it. I mean, just look at the last 10 years of news reports. There are near weekly or monthly news stories about police brutality or racism or profiling or X somewhere in the country. No, I don't think most police are racist, but that's irrelevant here, and I do think it's ignorant to think that just because most cop's are perfect role models doesn't mean there are some that aren't or even engage in misconduct. The huge race riots weren't exactly that long ago, and a lot of that stuff was captured on tape (more than enough to show misconduct, yet the riots were caused due to the aquittals iirc, and that says a lot about the legal system). Likewise, there are a lot of studies and statistics showing inequalities in the legal system. African-Americans for example are more likely to be sent to prison for the same crime as a white person, or to death row, or to be sentenced in court, etc. It's why so many say racism is an underlying problem that many people don't want to believe. I believe that's also why Davis is tense about it. There seems to be a huge "yes there is" and "No there isnt" populations in this town, as seen just this last year with other cases such as the Buzayan one. Many of the stories on this page are an example. And there have been a lot of allegations, more than enough to get the city council and commisions involved and to spur the creation of whatever city-police oversight they ended up making or will make. That said, I think the way I worded the above sentence is still fair and has basis. I asked JW to do it earlier since he's better at this kind of thing. Maybe he can do it more to your liking. Otherwise, please feel free to suggest something yourself rather than throw a retaliation fit? -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 27: </td> <td> Line 32: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:59:00CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 61: </td> <td> Line 61: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Jim! We've finally agreed! But remember- only if the person refuses to leave that balcony after repeated, and lawful, orders from the police. :) July 20th... I'll write that down so that you and I can send congratulatory messages to each other on every anniversary of our first agreement. :)--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:55:07CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *haha, ok. Just as an FYI- you are a very witty writer, and I found myself laughing out loud while reading your comments. Look, the whole debate between you and Steve (that I dropped in on) was becoming pretty confusing. Your "use of force" link was impressive and is indeed THE RULE for police officers. You were asking me to refute that link somehow, but that was never my intention, because refutation is impossible. Rules are rules, and cops gotta follow 'em! '''From what I understand of you and Steve's disagreement, you maintain that (in a hypothetical situation) it is illegal for officer 1 to have his gun drawn and hidden, if officer 1 is watching officer 2 talk to a suspect, and officer 2's weapon is not drawn. Is that right? Well, based on that, I'd agree with you, Edwin!''' It's unusual for officer 1's gun to be out! However, what if officer 1 noticed something that officer 2 missed? Like a bulge on the suspect's ankle? All I'm saying is that all three of us can argue hypotheticals til the cows come home, '''but in the end, we ALL agree that an officer cannot draw his gun unless he feels that there is some kind of imminent and lethal danger, and need to use that gun.''' And again, I feel that we should delete this whole section or at least move it to the talk page. Even though I hate seeing stories that discredit cops, I much more hate seeing cluttered, confusing debates on an otherwise tidy wiki page.--CameronMenezes<br> + *By the way, I never IM'ed Steve... and I don't see how that is relevant... unless you are suggesting that Steve and I are somehow coordinating our responses on silly davis wiki? hahahaha!! Now that, Edwin, is funny. Joy. :)--CameronMenezes<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:11:14EdwinSaadalol, i didnt see that the first time. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Fine, I'll find some stuff for you later. It's not that hard to find studies supporting the idea that racism is a factor in some police cases, it's pretty darn easy. Or studies on intimidation and fear tactics - that's simple too. Why would anyone be intimidated to see an officer with a hand on thier gun? Who knows. Nice to see you want to play the game now I guess, though you do want to take it to a new level. Funny, actually, since all I wanted was for Steve to admit what he said is done is is illegal, glad you guys posted a link earlier too! Oh wait, you just deleted it all when you couldnt support it (that was your compromise), and that was a far simpler matter. I should just delete this whole page (bias, anti-police). Do you want me to show links proving that police response time and accuracy improves when they have thier hand near the gun, or is that pro-police enough that you don't question it? Matter of fact, we should investigate and try to debunk every case here and just go around asking anyone whos ever had a police do thier job (respond to a call, no misconduct?) and help out write an appreciation story. Glee. -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Fine, I'll find some stuff for you later. It's not that hard to find studies supporting the idea that racism is a factor in some police cases, it's pretty darn easy. Or studies on intimidation and fear tactics - that's simple too. Why would anyone be intimidated to see an officer with a hand on thier gun? Who knows. Nice to see you want to play the game now I guess, though you do want to take it to a new level. Funny, actually, since all I wanted was for Steve to admit what he said is done is is illegal, glad you guys posted a link earlier too! Oh wait, you just deleted it all when you couldnt support it (that was your compromise), and that was a far simpler matter.<span>&nbsp;lol what?? ''Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.''. That's funny as hell. I think I posted "please give validation or links to prove me wrong" in 900 seperate paragraphs. And that wasn't an opinion, that was fact and law/rules/policy. I quoted a use of force policy that prohibits it, period , while Steve is going on about how its ok , or as long as the suspect doesnt see the gun because it can be hidden by the door. And then you come in (did he ask you on AIM?) and say we're all saying the same thing, lol! Not lol my friend. </span> I should just delete this whole page (bias, anti-police). Do you want me to show links proving that police response time and accuracy improves when they have thier hand near the gun, or is that pro-police enough that you don't question it? Matter of fact, we should investigate and try to debunk every case here and just go around asking anyone whos ever had a police do thier job (respond to a call, no misconduct?) and help out write an appreciation story. Glee. -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:10:28JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * I actually agree with you on this one, they should just shoot everyone on every balcony. ["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:07:12EdwinSaadalol. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Fine, I'll find some stuff for you later. It's not that hard to find studies supporting the idea that racism is a factor in some police cases, it's pretty darn easy. Or studies on intimidation and fear tactics - that's simple too. Why would anyone be intimidated to see an officer with a hand on thier gun? Who knows. Nice to see you want to play the game now I guess, though you do want to take it to a new level. Funny, actually, since all I wanted was for Steve to admit what he said is done is is illegal, glad you guys posted a link earlier too! Oh wait, you just deleted it all when you couldnt support it (that was your compromise), and that was a far simpler matter. I should just delete this whole page (bias, anti-police). Do you want me to show links proving that police response time and accuracy improves when they have thier hand near the gun, or is that pro-police enough that you don't question it? Matter of fact, we should investigate and try to debunk every case here and just go around asking anyone whos ever had a police do thier job (respond to a call, no misconduct?) and help out write an appreciation story. Glee. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 14:00:01CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 56: </td> <td> Line 56: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Officers gave orders for everyone to leave the area and return to their apartments/get off the apartment grounds. Officer did not know where, or who, was throwing the projectiles (at the police). A third-floor balcony with boozy people on it would scare me, as an officer, since those people could chuck anything right onto my head (if I were on the ground). In my opinion as a non-police officer, the people on that balcony were definitely an implicit, if not explicit, danger. Or should the cops have simply had blind faith in the goodness of the people on the balcony?--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 13:55:53CameronMenezesSaved too soon (oops) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly cited as a technique used in greater preval<span>a</span>nce against racial minorities.<br> <span>-</span> *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, <span>let's see some figures on that last sentence</span>. <span>'''</span>I want <span>studies proving conclusively that police officers rest their hands on their guns more often for minorities than for other people, and that police officers rest their hands on their guns specifically to intimidate people.''' Included in your figures I want the definition of "minority" for each of the studies you provide, as the definition of minority rapidly changes with time. Some of the studies you provide may have different sample groups than other studies. Since it is commonly cited, as you claim, I would like more than just one or two or three link</span>s. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.--CameronMenezes </td> <td> <span>+</span> * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly cited as a technique used in greater preval<span>e</span>nce against racial minorities.<br> <span>+</span> *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, <span>exactly WHO considers it a fear and intimidation tactic? And how commonly is it cited? I want to see some links providing studies that show HOW OFTEN officers rest their hands on guns during contact with racial minorities</span>. I want <span>to see how common this i</span>s. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.--CameronMenezes </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 13:53:20JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 55: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * The student was on the balcony of his third floor apartment looking down and whaat was happening. ["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 13:44:02CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Oh, ok. Now I see what your angle is. Edwin, let's see some figures on that last sentence. '''I want studies proving conclusively that police officers rest their hands on their guns more often for minorities than for other people, and that police officers rest their hands on their guns specifically to intimidate people.''' Included in your figures I want the definition of "minority" for each of the studies you provide, as the definition of minority rapidly changes with time. Some of the studies you provide may have different sample groups than other studies. Since it is commonly cited, as you claim, I would like more than just one or two or three links. Don't give me your personal opinion and state that "it is commony cited" and "it is considered", unless you are willing to back it up with some information.--CameronMenezes<br> + *As an aside, on my ride-alongs, I've seen officers rest their hands on their guns for vastly different groups of people, certainly not limited to minorities alone. Out of wild, random curiosity, Edwin- do you believe that most cops are racists? Your previous post certainly intimates this.--CameronMenezes<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 60: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *A-Dog, good point.--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 10:52:15DukeMcAdowItalics fix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 4: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''</span>[http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], According to the data presented, blacks and Latinos were arrested at significantly higher rates than whites during the first seven and a half months of 2005. From Jan. 1 to Aug. 19, Latinos accounted for 20.5 percent of all arrests in Davis, while comprising roughly 10 percent of the population. During the same period, blacks accounted for 9.2 percent of arrests, while comprising about 2.4 percent of the population. </td> <td> <span>+ </span>[http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], According to the data presented, blacks and Latinos were arrested at significantly higher rates than whites during the first seven and a half months of 2005. From Jan. 1 to Aug. 19, Latinos accounted for 20.5 percent of all arrests in Davis, while comprising roughly 10 percent of the population. During the same period, blacks accounted for 9.2 percent of arrests, while comprising about 2.4 percent of the population. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 30: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> August 4th, 2004: Criminal defense attorney Dean Johansson is pulled over by an officer. When asked for the reason for the stop, the officer responded that it was an "investigative" stop. As this is not a legal reason for a pull over, Mr. Johansson asked for a real reason- speeding, running stop sign. The officer said he did not have to give him a reason and asked for his license and registration. As an officer needs probable cause of a crime to pull over a vehicle, Mr. Johansson informed the officer he would not give him his license until given a legitmate legal reason. The officer then called in a "Code 3" emergency. Four other patrols cars arrive, officers exit the vehicle with guns drawn. After a lengthy discussion between the officer and his sergeant, they tell Mr Johansson he was pulled over for speeding. Mr Johansson then hands them his license and registration and is subsequently given a ticket.<span>''</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> August 4th, 2004: Criminal defense attorney Dean Johansson is pulled over by an officer. When asked for the reason for the stop, the officer responded that it was an "investigative" stop. As this is not a legal reason for a pull over, Mr. Johansson asked for a real reason- speeding, running stop sign. The officer said he did not have to give him a reason and asked for his license and registration. As an officer needs probable cause of a crime to pull over a vehicle, Mr. Johansson informed the officer he would not give him his license until given a legitmate legal reason. The officer then called in a "Code 3" emergency. Four other patrols cars arrive, officers exit the vehicle with guns drawn. After a lengthy discussion between the officer and his sergeant, they tell Mr Johansson he was pulled over for speeding. Mr Johansson then hands them his license and registration and is subsequently given a ticket. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 09:24:16EdwinSaadarewriting the wrong comment? k, but changing to neutral note instead. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - --During traffic stops its actually quite common, and entirely permissible, for either officer to have his hand resting on his gun. Steven Ostrowski<br> - <br> - <br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * It should be noted that it is acceptable and legal for officers to place thier hands on thier guns or holsters for various reasons. This can greatly assist in police response time in a situation where either lethal force, or the threat of lethal force, is neccessary. Unfortunately, it is also considered a fear and intimidation tactic done by an officer during questioning or interrogations, and is commonly cited as a technique used in greater prevalance against racial minorities.<br> + -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-20 08:56:09AlphaDogresponse to old comment re police shutting down business <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 59: </td> <td> Line 59: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Actually, police can shut down businesses when they feel that there is imminent threat of civil unrest. In 2006, the July 4 fireworks display at ["Raley Field"] was shut down by police after about 15minutes because a couple started a brawl that began to involve bystanders. How imminent threat is determined is, I suppose, at the discretion of the police officers present and is likely colored by their personal beliefs. --["AlphaDog"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 19:52:30DavidGreenwaldDon't delete it yet, I have 11-13 new cases to add shortly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 62: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ rg</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 19:20:07CameronMenezesMaybe we should kill it... how's this? Fair 'nuff? <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- During traffic stops its actually quite common for the second officer to have his hand resting on his gun or even out of sight so you don't see him. Sometimes during a traffic stop an officer will have his gun out but out of sight. I don't see this as a problem, the second officer is supposed to be protective of the first. Did Ceesay really believe the second officer would shoot him? Steven Ostrowski</span> </td> <td> <span>+ --During traffic stops its actually quite common, and entirely permissible, for either officer to have his hand resting on his gun. Steven Ostrowski</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right. According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise (Steve), I would like to see some proof and links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him is SOP as JW says, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'sometimes' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - <br> - <br> - I have to back this up (''Note that by this, I mean the second officer... I've never heard of a gun being drawn without probable cause, and none was drawn in the accounts of this case''). Standard procedure is for a second officer to stand in the blind spot (usually behind and to the left of the vehicle during a traffic stop) with a weapon ready -- not drawn, but a hand on the butt is common. You may know you're harmless, but the procedure treats everybody equally and has the officers prepared in case you aren't. I've been pulled over by police in Davis doing spot sobriety checks and had the exact same positioning of the officers. Unless there were Raiders stickers on the bike or something similar (clothing?), the Oakland questions were over the line, however. Unless they were looking for a specific person with tattoos who was from Oakland... which ''would'' explain the entire thing. After discounting procedure, it could easily go either way, hinging on if the police had a particular person they were looking for (from Oakland, with tattoos), or if they were making rather ignorant racial assumptions in their line of questioning. --["JabberWokky" jw]<br> - *You know, Edwin, Steve O. never said that officers "commonly" unholster their guns during traffic stops. He said they "sometimes" do. Which is true. Just wanted to clarify that. :) And you are correct, Edwin, that officers cannot just pull out their guns whenever they feel like it. There are a list of reasons why an officer is trained to draw his weapon, but it basically comes down to this: When the officer feels that his life or the life of another person is reasonably in danger. And just as an aside... most cops I've talked to don't really enjoy taking their weapon out, because the action of taking one's pistol out is in itself a reaction to the officer fearing for his personal safety. Oh, and JW- well-said.--CameronMenezes<br> - * thanks for the semantics, but that's irrelevant to what I was saying. I know 'why' they take thier guns out and why they are supposed to in certain situations, that's actually kind of a 'duh', but I refuse to accept they ''sometimes'' do for traffic stops as Steve has said. If you want to show me otherwise, I'd like to see some links and proof. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - *Another problem is that if the cop takes his gun out and the suspect refuses to be cooperative the cop is put in an awkward situation as to whether to put the gun away which makes him look lame, or shoot the guy. So cops only take out their guns when they really mean to shoot someone, not to act tough. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * ...right. So, some proof please? I know that the facts that with a gun already drawn, response time is better, accuracy is more assured with shooting, there is less of the shoulder jerk method, etc. But that's irrelevant to what I asked for - like I said, in most states just pulling a gun out is *against* the rules, policies, and laws (as I quoted an example above)- even an inappropriate "use of force". Unless have reasonable expectation they will need it or intend to use it, they do *not* have guns out even "sometimes" (thanks Cameron) for ''traffic'' stops. As you are saying otherwise Steve that they just sometimes have guns out for traffic stops, I'd like to see some links and proof. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - <br> - <br> - * The whole point is that the suspect doesn't know about the gun. Which means the cop may have the gun behind his back or below the car door so you can't see it. That's entirely different than having the gun pointed at the person and threatening to use it. My original point that is being lost here is that there is nothing wrong with having one's hand rest on the gun. It's supposedly misconduct to do what is quite normal in police work. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * No, still incorrect. It doesn't matter if the gun is seen or not, as most states ''prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized''. It doesn't say unholstering, drawing, *and* exhibiting, so it doesn't matter if the suspect knows or not. The whole point is the gun isn't supposed to just come out sometimes, and it's a whole different ballpark if it's pointed at someone or threatened to use. Hand on the holster is very different than an unholstered or drawn gun, regardless of whether its in view. As you say otherwise, I would still like to see proof validating these comments. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - * Considering Cessay was on a bike, I think the police would have a full view of him. I guess having a gun pulled on you while obstructing traffic with a bike, is one of those "unique to Davis" things we should never try to change. ["JimSchwab"]<br> - <br> - * My understanding is that the officer simply rested his hand on the gun, not pulled it out. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * Steve- that was my understanding as well.--CameronMenezes<br> - * Edwin- Ok, now I see what you are saying. Yes, you are entirely correct. Officers do not have their guns out, unless they reasonably expect to have need of using that gun, in a lethal manner. So yes, during a "normal" traffic stop, cops don't usually draw their guns if all seems cool. However, the officer has the right and responsibility to draw his gun if he has reason to believe that his gun may be needed. Additionally, just because a suspect isn't holding a weapon does not mean the officer can't draw his own weapon. Example- ordinary traffic stop, and there are multiple subjects in the vehicle. The driver is being cool, but one of the passengers has his hand in his pants pocket and is trying to pull something out. The officer tells the passenger to stop doing that. The passenger refuses to comply, and continues to try and get something out of his pants. If the police officer cannot get into the car fast enough to pull the passenger out and bring him under control. the officer may decide to pull his gun out (for his own safety) and repeat his order to the passenger. '''You see what I mean? There is really no such thing as an ordinary or normal traffic stop, so the officer has to use his/her own judgement concerning possible threats.--'''CameronMenezes<br> - *haha, ok you guys, I just re-read all these posts... it seems that we are pretty much in agreement on this issue! Steve, you mentioned the officer keeping his gun behind his back. It seems that the only time that might happen is when an officer has a feeling that something isn't quite right about a situation, but the officer doesn't have any reason to actually POINT his gun at the suspect... Regardless, an officer has the right to draw his weapon if he/she perceives any threat. Keeping your gun behind your back keeps you at the ready, but doesn't frighten the suspect into doing something crazy, like lunging at you. --CameronMenezes<br> - * Disagree with this too. The law in most places clearly states ''officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized''. Not "threat percieved", but a situation that may require deadly force. This is entirely different issue than if the officer next to the vehicle has his gun drawn, as Steve specifically said the second officer out of view. A second police officer cannot see what is in the car, and Steve is saying they sometimes have guns drawn. If the first police officer has not given any signal, or has not drawn any weapon, there is no reason a second officer will have probable cause of thinking the situation may escalate where deadly force is needed, and thus doesn't need to draw his gun. The law and most policies probhibit such actions, as I quoted and linked above. If you say otherwise, please link and validate it. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> - ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> - *Hey Edwin, my bad, I should have just used the phrase "in which an officer reasonably believes that a situation might escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized," instead of saying "perceived threat." For the purpose of my post, I equated the two, but I ought to have specified that. In other words- I do not dispute your link, or its common verbiage in police agencies across the nation- at all.--CameronMenezes<br> - *So... are you and Steve discussing a hypothetical scenario? Or are we still talking about the bicyclist who was stopped by... Davis PD? Or was it UCDPD? All three of us are cluttering this poor page! haha! I am going to step out of you and Steve's discussion on this scenario, because the hypotheticals are getting deeper and harder to follow. Hypotheticals are fun, but much more easily discussed in person/over the phone--CameronMenezes<br> - ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> - * I know the policy in Florida is that you can get a reprimand for unnecessarily drawing a firearm, and I'd imagine that enough of them (or an accidental discharge of an incorrectly drawn firearm, especially one that is tragic) can lead to termination. And that's Florida, which has remarkably liberal gun policies (liberal in the literal, not political sense). I used to work in the court system there and had a friend who was chief of police for many years. Drawing your firearm is a serious act that is noted in the incident report, not a casual act done "just in case". While I could be proven wrong with regard to California, Yolo or local policies, I'd be darned surprised. (Incidently, while this is a neat conversation, I think we've gone *well* past the boundaries of the topic. Is there wikiable info here, or should we just move/delete the entire thread?) --["JabberWokky" jw]<br> - ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 19:16:28CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 43: </td> <td> Line 43: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> + *Hey Edwin, my bad, I should have just used the phrase "in which an officer reasonably believes that a situation might escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized," instead of saying "perceived threat." For the purpose of my post, I equated the two, but I ought to have specified that. In other words- I do not dispute your link, or its common verbiage in police agencies across the nation- at all.--CameronMenezes<br> + *So... are you and Steve discussing a hypothetical scenario? Or are we still talking about the bicyclist who was stopped by... Davis PD? Or was it UCDPD? All three of us are cluttering this poor page! haha! I am going to step out of you and Steve's discussion on this scenario, because the hypotheticals are getting deeper and harder to follow. Hypotheticals are fun, but much more easily discussed in person/over the phone--CameronMenezes<br> + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 48: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 19:10:26JabberWokkyReply. Should this thread be killed? <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 43: </td> <td> Line 43: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * I know the policy in Florida is that you can get a reprimand for unnecessarily drawing a firearm, and I'd imagine that enough of them (or an accidental discharge of an incorrectly drawn firearm, especially one that is tragic) can lead to termination. And that's Florida, which has remarkably liberal gun policies (liberal in the literal, not political sense). I used to work in the court system there and had a friend who was chief of police for many years. Drawing your firearm is a serious act that is noted in the incident report, not a casual act done "just in case". While I could be proven wrong with regard to California, Yolo or local policies, I'd be darned surprised. (Incidently, while this is a neat conversation, I think we've gone *well* past the boundaries of the topic. Is there wikiable info here, or should we just move/delete the entire thread?) --["JabberWokky" jw]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 18:59:30EdwinSaadareplies, disagree. its in two parts, this is becomming fragmented. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 35: </td> <td> Line 35: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * No, still incorrect. It doesn't matter if the gun is seen or not, as most states ''prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized''. It doesn't say unholstering, drawing, *and* exhibiting, so it doesn't matter if the suspect knows or not. The whole point is the gun isn't supposed to just come out sometimes, and it's a whole different ballpark if it's pointed at someone or threatened to use. Hand on the holster is very different than an unholstered or drawn gun, regardless of whether its in view. As you say otherwise, I would still like to see proof validating these comments. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 42: </td> <td> Line 42: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Disagree with this too. The law in most places clearly states ''officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized''. Not "threat percieved", but a situation that may require deadly force. This is entirely different issue than if the officer next to the vehicle has his gun drawn, as Steve specifically said the second officer out of view. A second police officer cannot see what is in the car, and Steve is saying they sometimes have guns drawn. If the first police officer has not given any signal, or has not drawn any weapon, there is no reason a second officer will have probable cause of thinking the situation may escalate where deadly force is needed, and thus doesn't need to draw his gun. The law and most policies probhibit such actions, as I quoted and linked above. If you say otherwise, please link and validate it. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 18:48:18CameronMenezeshaha, an addition <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 41: </td> <td> Line 41: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *haha, ok you guys, I just re-read all these posts... it seems that we are pretty much in agreement on this issue! Steve, you mentioned the officer keeping his gun behind his back. It seems that the only time that might happen is when an officer has a feeling that something isn't quite right about a situation, but the officer doesn't have any reason to actually POINT his gun at the suspect... Regardless, an officer has the right to draw his weapon if he/she perceives any threat. Keeping your gun behind your back keeps you at the ready, but doesn't frighten the suspect into doing something crazy, like lunging at you. --CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 18:31:04CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 39: </td> <td> Line 39: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- -----</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Steve- that was my understanding as well.--CameronMenezes<br> + * Edwin- Ok, now I see what you are saying. Yes, you are entirely correct. Officers do not have their guns out, unless they reasonably expect to have need of using that gun, in a lethal manner. So yes, during a "normal" traffic stop, cops don't usually draw their guns if all seems cool. However, the officer has the right and responsibility to draw his gun if he has reason to believe that his gun may be needed. Additionally, just because a suspect isn't holding a weapon does not mean the officer can't draw his own weapon. Example- ordinary traffic stop, and there are multiple subjects in the vehicle. The driver is being cool, but one of the passengers has his hand in his pants pocket and is trying to pull something out. The officer tells the passenger to stop doing that. The passenger refuses to comply, and continues to try and get something out of his pants. If the police officer cannot get into the car fast enough to pull the passenger out and bring him under control. the officer may decide to pull his gun out (for his own safety) and repeat his order to the passenger. '''You see what I mean? There is really no such thing as an ordinary or normal traffic stop, so the officer has to use his/her own judgement concerning possible threats.--'''CameronMenezes<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 17:25:11SteveOstrowskiTime of the data <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 4: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''[http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], Latinos make up 10% of the Davis population while accounting for 20% of arrests. African-Americans are 2.4% of the population but account for 9.2% of arrests.''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ ''[http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13489410p-14330102c.html According to information] provided by the ["Davis Police Department"], According to the data presented, blacks and Latinos were arrested at significantly higher rates than whites during the first seven and a half months of 2005. From Jan. 1 to Aug. 19, Latinos accounted for 20.5 percent of all arrests in Davis, while comprising roughly 10 percent of the population. During the same period, blacks accounted for 9.2 percent of arrests, while comprising about 2.4 percent of the population.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 17:16:14SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 31: </td> <td> Line 31: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + * The whole point is that the suspect doesn't know about the gun. Which means the cop may have the gun behind his back or below the car door so you can't see it. That's entirely different than having the gun pointed at the person and threatening to use it. My original point that is being lost here is that there is nothing wrong with having one's hand rest on the gun. It's supposedly misconduct to do what is quite normal in police work. --["SteveOstrowski"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 32: </td> <td> Line 36: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * My understanding is that the officer simply rested his hand on the gun, not pulled it out. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 17:10:26JamesSchwab <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 31: </td> <td> Line 31: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Considering Cessay was on a bike, I think the police would have a full view of him. I guess having a gun pulled on you while obstructing traffic with a bike, is one of those "unique to Davis" things we should never try to change. ["JimSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 16:54:23EdwinSaadareplies. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right. According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise (Steve), I would like to see some proof and links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him is SOP as JW says, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops '<span>commonly</span>' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less <span>''common''</span> when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right. According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise (Steve), I would like to see some proof and links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him is SOP as JW says, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops '<span>sometimes</span>' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 28: </td> <td> Line 28: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ * thanks for the semantics, but that's irrelevant to what I was saying. I know 'why' they take thier guns out and why they are supposed to in certain situations, that's actually kind of a 'duh', but I refuse to accept they ''sometimes'' do for traffic stops as Steve has said. If you want to show me otherwise, I'd like to see some links and proof. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 30: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * ...right. So, some proof please? I know that the facts that with a gun already drawn, response time is better, accuracy is more assured with shooting, there is less of the shoulder jerk method, etc. But that's irrelevant to what I asked for - like I said, in most states just pulling a gun out is *against* the rules, policies, and laws (as I quoted an example above)- even an inappropriate "use of force". Unless have reasonable expectation they will need it or intend to use it, they do *not* have guns out even "sometimes" (thanks Cameron) for ''traffic'' stops. As you are saying otherwise Steve that they just sometimes have guns out for traffic stops, I'd like to see some links and proof. -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 16:25:07SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 28: </td> <td> Line 28: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *Another problem is that if the cop takes his gun out and the suspect refuses to be cooperative the cop is put in an awkward situation as to whether to put the gun away which makes him look lame, or shoot the guy. So cops only take out their guns when they really mean to shoot someone, not to act tough. --["SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 16:00:08CameronMenezesMy $.02 :) and props to JW <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 27: </td> <td> Line 27: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ *You know, Edwin, Steve O. never said that officers "commonly" unholster their guns during traffic stops. He said they "sometimes" do. Which is true. Just wanted to clarify that. :) And you are correct, Edwin, that officers cannot just pull out their guns whenever they feel like it. There are a list of reasons why an officer is trained to draw his weapon, but it basically comes down to this: When the officer feels that his life or the life of another person is reasonably in danger. And just as an aside... most cops I've talked to don't really enjoy taking their weapon out, because the action of taking one's pistol out is in itself a reaction to the officer fearing for his personal safety. Oh, and JW- well-said.--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:31:10JabberWokkyItalics ran ranpant (fixed) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 18: </td> <td> Line 18: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said. ''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives;Racism at root of police complaint]'' By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer Published: October 15, 2004<span>''</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> October 5th, 2004: African-American UC Davis graduate student Ebrima Ceesay was stopped by UC Davis police at the corner of Kleiber Hall and Hutchison drives at about 4 p.m. for obstructing traffic by not giving the right of way to a pedestrian. The officer then proceeded to ask if Ceesay ever had any driving tickets, criminal records, tattoos on his body, or lived in Oakland. Ceesay said he found the questions "demeaning and dishonoring," and of no relevance to the alleged bike infraction. During the incident, a second officer pulled up behind Le's patrol car and observed the conversation with one hand resting on his gun, Ceesay said. ''[http://occr.ucdavis.edu/news/view.cfm?news_id=61 The Davis Enterprise Archives;Racism at root of police complaint]'' By Lauren Keene Enterprise staff writer Published: October 15, 2004 </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:29:53JabberWokkyES -- Check this to make sure I deleted the right paragraph. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 22: </td> <td> Line 22: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> - <br> - * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right (even for a car). According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof or links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:29:02JabberWokkyAh. Drew my comment out of that, clarified I'm *not* talking about a drawn gun. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 22: </td> <td> Line 22: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- I have to back this up. Standard procedure is for a second officer to stand in the blind spot (usually behind and to the left of the vehicle during a traffic stop) with a weapon ready. You may know you're harmless, but the procedure treats everybody equally and has the officers prepared in case you aren't. I've been pulled over by police in Davis doing spot sobriety checks and had the exact same positioning of the officers. Unless there were Raider stickers on the car or something similar, the Oakland questions were over the line, however. Unless they were looking for a specific person with tattoos who was from Oakland... which ''would'' explain the entire thing. --["JabberWokky" jw]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> + <br> + * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right (even for a car). According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof or links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 27: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + I have to back this up (''Note that by this, I mean the second officer... I've never heard of a gun being drawn without probable cause, and none was drawn in the accounts of this case''). Standard procedure is for a second officer to stand in the blind spot (usually behind and to the left of the vehicle during a traffic stop) with a weapon ready -- not drawn, but a hand on the butt is common. You may know you're harmless, but the procedure treats everybody equally and has the officers prepared in case you aren't. I've been pulled over by police in Davis doing spot sobriety checks and had the exact same positioning of the officers. Unless there were Raiders stickers on the bike or something similar (clothing?), the Oakland questions were over the line, however. Unless they were looking for a specific person with tattoos who was from Oakland... which ''would'' explain the entire thing. After discounting procedure, it could easily go either way, hinging on if the police had a particular person they were looking for (from Oakland, with tattoos), or if they were making rather ignorant racial assumptions in their line of questioning. --["JabberWokky" jw]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:20:40EdwinSaadafix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right<span>&nbsp;(even for a car)</span>. According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof <span>or</span> links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right. According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise<span>&nbsp;(Steve)</span>, I would like to see some proof <span>and</span> links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him<span>&nbsp;is SOP as JW says</span>, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'd be even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:19:25EdwinSaadait was a reply to steves comment about "gun out" being common <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not<span>. Keep in mind that this suspect was on a bicycle, with complete visibility - not in a vehicle</span>. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right (even for a car). According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof or links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'<span>s</span> even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.<span>&nbsp;</span>) -["EdwinSaada" ES]<span><br> - <br> - * Where do you get that he drew or displayed his firearm? Maybe there's more to this than I'm aware. I thought he just stood there with his hand resting on the butt in the holster. If he drew the firearm as you say, that's a whole different kettle of fish. You've clearly got more info than we have available, please share. --["JabberWokky" jw]</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right (even for a car). According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof or links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it'<span>d be</span> even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too.) -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 09:14:11JabberWokkyYou've clearly got more info than we have available. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + * Where do you get that he drew or displayed his firearm? Maybe there's more to this than I'm aware. I thought he just stood there with his hand resting on the butt in the holster. If he drew the firearm as you say, that's a whole different kettle of fish. You've clearly got more info than we have available, please share. --["JabberWokky" jw]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 08:05:49EdwinSaadareply. want links please. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Doesn't that apply to vehicles, where visibility of the suspect is limited and he could have anything in his car? I was pretty sure a second officer is normal in a blind spot, but actually drawing and unholstering the gun is not. Keep in mind that this suspect was on a bicycle, with complete visibility - not in a vehicle. I grew up in DC, and I know for a fact that that's not right (even for a car). According to the ''Memorandum of Agreement on the Use of Force. Between the US Department of Justice and the DC Metropolitan Police Department June 13, 2001'' ''38. The policy shall define and describe the types of force and the circumstances under which use of such force is appropriate. The policy '''shall prohibit officers from unholstering, drawing, or exhibiting a firearm unless the officer reasonably believes that a situation may escalate to the point where deadly force would be authorized'''.'' Pulling the gun preemptively for no reason is considered a use of force in many states iirc. If you say otherwise, I would like to see some proof or links of validation please. I know about the second officer in a spot where its hard to see him, but I think it's absolute bs to say that cops 'commonly' unholster guns for routine traffic stops. (I bet it's even less ''common'' when the suspect is on a bicycle too. ) -["EdwinSaada" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-19 07:24:22JabberWokkySteve's right -- it's SOP <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + I have to back this up. Standard procedure is for a second officer to stand in the blind spot (usually behind and to the left of the vehicle during a traffic stop) with a weapon ready. You may know you're harmless, but the procedure treats everybody equally and has the officers prepared in case you aren't. I've been pulled over by police in Davis doing spot sobriety checks and had the exact same positioning of the officers. Unless there were Raider stickers on the car or something similar, the Oakland questions were over the line, however. Unless they were looking for a specific person with tattoos who was from Oakland... which ''would'' explain the entire thing. --["JabberWokky" jw]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-18 22:51:51SteveOstrowskiHand on the gun. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 19: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + During traffic stops its actually quite common for the second officer to have his hand resting on his gun or even out of sight so you don't see him. Sometimes during a traffic stop an officer will have his gun out but out of sight. I don't see this as a problem, the second officer is supposed to be protective of the first. Did Ceesay really believe the second officer would shoot him? Steven Ostrowski</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Police Misconduct Storieshttp://daviswiki.org/Police_Misconduct_Stories2006-07-17 00:03:28CameronMenezes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Police Misconduct Stories<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Just an FYI- it is perfectly legal for police to "enter" this type of situation, even though this wiki entry implies otherwise...--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 48: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> April, 2004: Sterling Apartment pre-Picnic Day party. Anonymous UC Davis football player is shot in the eye with a police pepper<span>-spary bullet gun.</span> The student was on his balcony in Sterling. Police are <span>specifically trained to shoot the guns at the chest</span>, otherwise the guns become [http://www.policeone.com/pdfs/bostonglobe.pdf lethal]. The student became blind in the eye he was hit in, and lost his sports scholarship. A lawsuit he filed is still pending.<br> <span>- <br> - --</span>What was the student doing when he was shot? <span>Was he throwing a bottle at the officer, perhaps?</span> Why did this student remain at the party after being given lawful orders to disperse (leave the area)? I know for a fact that officers gave orders to disperse MULTIPLE times before firing any pepper projectiles. --<span>-</span>CameronMenezes </td> <td> <span>+</span> April, 2004: Sterling Apartment pre-Picnic Day party. Anonymous UC Davis football player is shot in the eye with a police pepper<span>&nbsp;spray projectile. (basically a paintball gun that shoots pellets filled with a mixture of cayenne pepper and water)</span> The student was on his balcony in Sterling<span>&nbsp;Apartments, during the Sterling riots</span>. Police are <span>trained to avoid shooting the pepper projectile guns at peoples' heads</span>, otherwise the guns<span>&nbsp;MAY</span> become [http://www.policeone.com/pdfs/bostonglobe.pdf lethal]. <span>&nbsp;</span>The student became blind in the eye he was hit in, and lost his sports scholarship. A lawsuit he filed is still pending.<br> <span>+ *</span>What was the student doing when he was shot? <span>He was obviously not leaving the area.</span> Why did this student remain at the party after being given lawful orders to disperse (leave the area)? I know for a fact that officers gave orders to disperse MULTIPLE times before firing any pepper projectiles. --CameronMenezes </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 53: </td> <td> Line 53: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Don't know about the rest of the stuff, but how could the police have anything to do with businesses closing early? Police officers cannot tell businesses to close, unless, of course, the business is illegal! :) Black Family Day is a large event (with great food, I might add). Having other agencies on-call doesn't seem that unusual... just my $.02.--CameronMenezes</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div>