Oklahoma officers who beat man won't be charged - NAACP disagrees

Associated Press ^ | January 9, 2003 | Associated Press Staff

[MeekOneGOP]

Oklahoma officers who beat man won't be charged

U.S. attorney: Rights of suspect videotaped not violated

01/09/2003

Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY - Two police officers who were videotaped hitting an unarmed black suspect repeatedly with nightsticks will not be charged with civil rights violations, federal prosecutors said Wednesday.

U.S. Attorney Robert McCampbell said there was no evidence that the Oklahoma City officers willfully deprived Donald Pete of his constitutional rights during the July incident. He said police conduct based on mistakes or bad judgment is not enough to add up to a willful violation.

"We considered officers' statements that the suspect posed a threat to their safety as long as he was refusing to be handcuffed," said Mr. McCampbell, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma. "We considered the fact that officers ceased to use force as soon as the suspect was handcuffed."

Clara Luper, a youth adviser for the NAACP in Oklahoma City, disagreed with the decision.

"The U.S. attorney is constitutionally blind as far as we are concerned," Ms. Luper said. "If it took him months to figure this out, it shows we need a new U.S. attorney.

"I don't know what other evidence you need other than seeing that man being beaten up."

Officers Greg Driskill and E.J. Dyer approached Mr. Pete on July 8 after an anti-prostitution activist called police about a couple having sex in a van in a church parking lot.

The activist, Brian Bates, then videotaped the subsequent arrest. His video showed the two white officers striking Mr. Pete more than two dozen times with their batons.

The videotape, which was shown on television news shows across the nation, led to complaints from civil rights advocates and members of the black community. Mr. Pete has filed a tort claim with the city seeking $7.7 million in damages.

The officers said Mr. Pete would not comply with their orders and was trying to destroy evidence by eating marijuana. They are on restricted duty pending Oklahoma County District Attorney Wes Lane's findings.

Mr. Lane said Wednesday that he would have a decision within a month on whether to pursue a state case against the officers.

"It will be more than me just saying thumbs up or thumbs down," he said. "I will bring in an expert to explain to the media some of the issues. We'll actually convene a community forum, and we will play the videotape."

Mr. Pete's attorney, Roland V. Combs III, did not plan to comment Wednesday, a spokesman for his law firm said.

---

Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dallas/tsw/stories/010903dntextape.7fb86.html

[coloradan]

You have the Constitutional right to be handcuffed by police, and the Constitutional right to be brutally beaten by police if you don't exercise the aforementioned right. This man's rights weren't violated at all.

[republicman]

Since I haven't seen the video I have no idea what exactly happened.

But I suspect that won't stop the knee jerk copbashers here who also haven't seen the video from crawling out from under their slimy rocks to use this as an excuse to attack all cops.

[lepton]

"We considered officers' statements that the suspect posed a threat to their safety as long as he was refusing to be handcuffed," said Mr. McCampbell, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma. "We considered the fact that officers ceased to use force as soon as the suspect was handcuffed."

If he was resisting arrest, especially given direct evidence for cause for arrest, he is subject to the minimum it takes to place him under arrest. Obviously the beatee wanted the force used to be more than having the handcuffs put on.

[Eternal_Bear]

The officers said Mr. Pete would not comply with their orders and was trying to destroy evidence by eating marijuana

salad to go along with his Congolese pygmy steak?

[judgeandjury]

Mr. Pete has filed a tort claim with the city seeking $7.7 million in damages.

I think that Mr. Pete should hire Mr. Dave and Mr. Joe as his attorneys.