Will the UCLA incident cops face criminal charges?

[Jed Dilligan]

[KyndCulture]

1. Wreckless Endangerment at the very LEAST.

[acmavm]

2. No. They try to prosecute this cop, they'll have to prosecute

others who do the same thing. (Who were lucky enough not to get caught on camera.)

[Jed Dilligan]

4. Interesting take--I wish they were as even-handed

as you suggest.

Another interesting phenomenon: the sarcastic and non-sarcastic "No" choices, which essentially say the same thing in different tones, are currently neck-in-neck.

[readmoreoften]

3. People who support the UCLA campus cops in this incident freak me out. /nt

[Jed Dilligan]

6. See my post 4--there is amazing cognitive dissonance

going on.

[shanti]

8. me too.

i have a post up on another (non political) site, and several people have been stating that "well, if only he'd followed orders", "if he hadn't forgotten his id", yada yada. it makes me :puke:

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

12. I'm one of 'em

Don't jump down my throat over it, please, but I'm one who voted for the cops. That does not mean that I endorse their decisions; I don't. The trouble is, after viewing the the video many, many times, I'm still convinced that Tabatabainejad not only initiated the conflict, but he could have stopped it from progressing.

[Jed Dilligan]

13. "Initiated the conflict"?

Who walked up to whom?

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

15. I don't know

what happened before the start of the video. I hope to find out as more evidence comes in, as it certainly will.
At this point, it looks to me like a conflict with police was what Tabatabainejad wanted and he made sure it happened.
Also, although it was stupid, I don't think the police action rises to the level of "torture," as others obviously do.

[Karenina]

45. Now might be a good time

for you to take a l-o-n-g look in a mirror, that you may perhaps see the grotesque biases your posts have shown others of us so clearly.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

52. only a couple of points, not extreme

I'm OK with me, thank you very much.

There are many dimensions to this incident. Tabatabainejad's actions, the police actions, spectators' actions, legal ramifications, race, taser and its implications, etc., etc. That's why it's interesting to so many people. There are a couple of these dimensions that I don't happen to agree with the crowd but I don't think that makes me a freak.

[Karenina]

53. This is not a complicated issue.

Nor is your "OK"ness with yourself.

"At this point, it looks to me like a conflict with police was what Tabatabainejad wanted and he made sure it happened."

A very annoyed, recalcitrant 23 year-old was on his way OUT THE DOOR.

"Also, although it was stupid, I don't think the police action rises to the level of "torture," as others obviously do."

Perhaps in your New Amurikkka, you or someone near and dear may also experience being tasered multiple times while handcuffed for, let's say... littering. I'm certain such a personal experience would spur some rethinking on your part.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

56. Right, I said that, and I stand by it.

Those are still my opinions, subject to change as new information becomes available.

[Jed Dilligan]

58. Did you hear the screams?

I don't think he was faking it.

What's the definition of torture? I would say inflicting pain to produce a change of attitude falls within it.

[shanti]

40. no

if you voted for the cops, then you endorsed what they did....yes, you are one of THEM. :(

[Richard Steele]

41. He was being tased while prone and handcuffed....

...and you are "convinced" that he "could have stopped it from progressing."

How do you figure THAT, pray tell?

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

43. He was still lucid and able to communicate.

He could have said "OK" or "help me up" just as easily as "Fuck you."

[Richard Steele]

44. And that is a reason to TORTURE him? Because he could still SPEAK?

Lord, what a RIDICULOUS assertation.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

49. What's rediculous

is the way you put words in my mouth. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. If you can find something I wrote that looks like I said that, check the context, because I didn't.

[Richard Steele]

54. You've supported this torture and blamed the victim right from the get-go.

No one has put any words in your mouth. There's
hardly any need for that, considering the opinions
you have expressed on this subject.

IN YOUR OWN WORDS:
Quote, "With regard to this particular incident,
this student sounds like a damned fool to me and he's lucky
he didn't get worse."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2733164&mesg_id=2733498

Did I put THOSE words in your mouth as well?
Anyone can use the "SEARCH" function to see
all of your words for themselves, so there's
hardly any need for me to INVENT any.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

55. But the context of that was what cops do to gain compliance.

If they hadn't used a taser, I believe they would have beat him to gain compliance. Don't you?

[Karenina]

57. Moot point.

Steve Yagman is on the case and HEADS WILL ROLL. :bounce::bounce::bounce:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. Meh.

I don't think they really believe it.

I think they're just saying this stupid shit to get a rise out of people.

[athena]

51. I think they're trolls. /nt

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Could be a federal indictment of 42 USC Section 1985(3)

for violation of civil rights, conspiracy of police bruality.

http://www2.law.columbia.edu/faculty_franke/Civil%20Rights/2002.htm

[Jed Dilligan]

7. I was thinking assault and battery, plus reckless endangerment,

but yours works too.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Not to mention an action in civil court for damages for

intentional tort, assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, etc. Throw in the university as a defendant for negligent hiring and same causes of action for the cops.

[Jed Dilligan]

I think that's already underway.

I'm just wondering if these cops will ever be identified officially as the criminals they are. More than money is at stake.

[Jed Dilligan]

10. self delete

I will get a new mouse soon--promise.

[no_hypocrisy]

39. BINGO!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2745401

[madmusic]

11. police authority would be undermined?

If you voted for this, speak up!

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

16. Didn't like the wording

Unfortunately, that choice had both a result and a reason in it. I didn't like the reason but I did agree with the result, so it was my choice.

[Jed Dilligan]

How would you have worded it?

I'll add your choice if there's still time.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

20. "No"

or possibley "No, and that's a good thing."

[Jed Dilligan]

21. I would add that if you gave an alternate reason

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

25. Please don't change it on my account

It's good enough; I was just trying to explain my choice.

[Jed Dilligan]

26. I'm interested to know why,

other than the possibility of authority being undermined, you would oppose criminal charges.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

29. There's still a lot of doubt

in my mind, at least, about what happened. Additional facts could swing it either way.
If it turns out that Tabatabainejad was trying to start a ruckus with the police intentionally,
then he takes most of the blame. Therefore, not guilty for the cops.

[Jed Dilligan]

30. "Starting a ruckus"

not grounds for electrical torture AFTER subdual last I checked. Is verbally defying a police officer grounds for physical attack? I know that in practice it is so, but I don't think it is in the law.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

35. I agree it's not, at least the way you describe it.. nt

[readmoreoften]

60. Jed do you have any idea how many times my mother accused me of causing a ruckus as a kid?

When do moms and dads get tasers? Children should obey their parents too, right?

[Jed Dilligan]

61. They could just put the kid in a shock collar

that works by remote control. Maybe we should all wear one--then the world would be perfectly safe!

[Jed Dilligan]

31. self delete

ugh, sick of this mouse!

[madmusic]

32. Innocent until proven guilty?

You have tradition behind you there, but it is possible many doubt that will work if they investigate themselves, which is how most internal investigations go. This issue may be an undercurrent to the more obvious issue.

Glad you spoke up because you have a valid reason and I couldn't understand before what it could be.

EDIT typo

[Jed Dilligan]

33. I'm not against the burden of proof

being on the prosecution, but I don't think that equates to not wanting the prosecution to happen at all.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

36. There's no hiding from it

With as many eyes as this incident has on it, I have no doubt that all will be revealed in time.
Along with everybody else, I expect crimes by the police to be prosecuted.

[madmusic]

38. So, you're saying even if guilty they should not be prosecuted?

That sounds like it might be the foundations of the police "code of silence." What motivates that? What justifies it?

Serious question, not an accusation.

[Jed Dilligan]

46. No, saying the opposite. nt

[Jed Dilligan]

34. self delete

again

[Jed Dilligan]

19. self delete

boy this mouse is good for my post count

[flying_monkeys]

14. Criminal charges? Doubtful. But civil rights charges? Oh yeah, baby.

I'll take violation of a slew of civil rights and "excessive use of force" as my prediction.

[Jed Dilligan]

17. There are criminal civil rights violations nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. No, but not for teh reasons you cited

since these guys are badged they are allowed to make mistakes

Will and should they face disciplinary action and even firing? You can bet on that one

[Jed Dilligan]

23. That would be choice one

as far as I'm concerned. You are applying a double standard because these are cops. I think they should face exactly the same punishment as a civilian who electrocuted a defenseless person.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. No I am not

these are legal standards that are there to protect law enforcement

Whether those standad should be chagned or not is not part of your question.

I just stated why they will not face criminal prosecution, and civll prosection is not out of the realm of possibility right now.

[Jed Dilligan]

28. Please direct me to the statute or law

that says a police officer electrocuting an unarmed and defenseless person is not an assault.

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

37. "Electrocution"

is death by electricity. There is NO WAY the cops were trying to kill Tabatabainejad.

[Jed Dilligan]

47. I didn't know lethality was part of the definition

it's still a physical assault, isn't it?

[DemoDemoCratCrat]

50. Yes, it certainly was use of force........nt

[Jed Dilligan]

48. I didn't know lethality was part of the definition

it's still a physical assault, isn't it?

[readmoreoften]

59. No way, huh? Almost 300 people have died from Taser shocks

in the past few years in the United States. They shocked him how many times? 5? 6? 7? 8? How do you know there is NO WAY that deep down inside they hoped the suspect would suffer injury or death. What are you now? A fucking mind reader?

[Jed Dilligan]

24. self delete

dupe

[StraightDope]

42. Well, as of 5:38 EST...

It's clear to me that 13% of the people who responded to this have no business on a board such as this.

How do you people live with yourselves?

[0rganism]

62. shades of Rodney King?

I don't expect to see any convictions from this.

[Jed Dilligan]

63. Except, this time they're fucking with an extremely wealthy community...

Persians in LA aren't disenfranchised; they're loaded. They just might be able to exert enough political pressure to win at least a symbolic conviction...