Posted on 04/29/2005 1:47:41 PM PDT by Sterm26
SAN FRANCISCO - Law enforcement officers from two northern California counties were found liable Thursday for using excessive force by swabbing pepper spray in the eyes of logging protesters in 1997. A jury awarded eight plaintiffs $1 each.
It was the third trial in the case; the first two ended in deadlocked juries in 1998 and 2004.
The plaintiffs laughed and hugged outside the courtroom — and applauded when jurors left their chambers.
"They did the right thing," said Terri Slanetz, a 42-year-old naturalist from Oakland. "We've been trying all along to get a statement that this was illegal. It's a positive step toward people treating each other decently."
The protesters claim their civil rights were violated when Humboldt County sheriff's deputies and Eureka police officers swabbed pepper spray directly in their eyes during the 1997 protest.
The protesters argued the pepper spray was used to illegally punish and intimidate them for chaining themselves together and making it difficult for authorities to arrest them.
Attorneys said the verdict would prevent the use of pepper spray on nonviolent protesters.
"The plaintiffs were never in it for the money. They were in it for the principle," attorney Tony Serra said.
The defendants in the case were Humboldt County, the city of Eureka, retired county Sheriff Dennis Lewis and current Sheriff Gary Philp, who was chief deputy sheriff at the time of the protest.
"It's nice to have someone come in with some kind of resolution of the case," Philp said. "The nominal damages show that the jury thought no one got hurt."
The protests took place at the Eureka office of then-Rep. Frank Riggs, and at the Scotia headquarters of the Pacific Lumber Co.
Starting fires after Schwarzenneger won..Oh that`s right, there`s no evidence of that. Uhh..Yeah ok. It must have all been a coincidence.
I have no love for these protesters or their position but I find the cops' actions absolutely unjustifiable. They dishonor any LEO who wears a badge.
I think this is a case where there should be more former LEO's
Ok... let's say a group of people walk into your house and chains themselves to a fridge.
Should the police wait around and do nothing?
This was a civil trial, the jury found damages for $1, which means that they didn't think the actions needed a large monetary settlement. They believed the police were slightly overagressive, and that it was not torture. Hence the $1 award.
A million dollar award would have been different.
For that matter even if a person was chained to my refrigerator, I would not torture him. I would simply remove him. Now if he was resisting with any kind of force, that changes things.
I haven't studied this particular case but the fact that they were able to apply pepper spray to their eyes with swabs, makes it pretty clear they weren't fighting them.
Cops simply abusing their authority.
I hope they pay you in "priciple", Tony.
"I would simply remove him. Now if he was resisting with any kind of force, that changes things."
See thats the crux of the matter. You cannot simply remove them, because they are chained up and refuse to leave.
You must use some force to move them and that is what the officers did.
Ever heard of bolt cutters, diamond saws, ceramic cut off wheels etc?
And so the protestors will magically move away when you cut the cable??
You have to lay your hands on them to move them.
Not legally, a win is a win and the jury found against the police.
We differ. The police are the government and as a conservative, I distrust the government. When a jury finds against the government in a proceeding where evidence neither you nor I heard was presented, I am convinced the government, in this case the police, over-reached and violated the law.
But, as I said, we differ.
"In both cases demonstrators linked their arms inside metal sleeves and refused to let go until after the liquid spray was applied.
Authorities said they used the pepper spray because they were afraid that cutting the metal cuffs would injure the demonstrators."
Bolt cutters and saws would not have worked in this case.
"The police are the government and as a conservative, I distrust the government."
No sir... distrusting the government is not part and parcel with being a conservtive. To say so is to insult most conservatives, including myself.
We seriously differ.
There are important FACTS being left out of this story, and the *))(*(^ person who wrote this -- knows the facts are not being fully told.
The protestors STORMED Frank Riggs' office -Shouting, screaming, and refused to leave after they were repeatedly, and civilly asked to leave or, be civil. They continued to harangue, heckle, scream.
I didn't think the pepper spray was inappropriate. These protestors stormed, like wild animals. They were not members of the "civil society" when they did what they did.
You are obviously not aware of the full facts. If you were, I hardly think a "Leo" would assert such nonsense as you have in your post. You were not given the full set of facts in the article.
OK I didn't know that. If they had no other way of removing them then fine. In my minds eye I pictured them simply using the pepper to make them move because they weren't obeying their orders.
Are you a troll? Is this what Leo-Trolls sound like? Get the facts, dude. You don't have them. You have no idea what happened in Frank Riggs' office that day.
Bingo.
Yep, you are right, I wasn't aware of what was really happening. If what I thought was happening was the case then I maintain my position was correct, but I see that wasn't the case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.