California protesters win pepper spray lawsuit

Yahoo News/AP ^ | 04/29/05 | Justin M. Noton

[longtermmemmory]

IOW do not swab, use a large hose to spray with intense force.

[BenLurkin]

Attorneys said the verdict would prevent the use of pepper spray on nonviolent protesters.

Not too many years ago LAPD used a technique of intentionally BREAKING ARMS of anti-abortion protesters peacfully blocking the doors to an abortion "clinic". It pretty much ended the non-violent protests in the L.A. area.

Wonder if LAPD will do that again -- and if not . . .

[muir_redwoods]

"You have no idea what happened in Frank Riggs' office that day."

You weren't there either dude. The jury heard the case and they found the police at fault. Those are the facts that matter.

[Alia]

To both: I was shocked at the facts NOT presented in the article. No, I wasn't in the room that day; I know people who were; and the bay area was plastered with the accounts via newspaper and newsies, at the time. These protestors were not peaceful. Their very behavior boded "violence". Just prior to this "protest" a few loggers had been badly hurt by not only rigged trees, but open shots. The police had cause to be on alert. The protestors did an effective "taunt". "I'm getting in your face and you can't do anything about it!".

But yes, the facts "that mattered" were only that some protestors who stormed an office of a Rep, screaming, chaining themselves, got subdued, and the police are found "at fault".

Yarddog - thanks for handling my and disgust (over the lack of facts) so gently.

Frank Riggs was just the kind of Republican many in this forum are hoping to see more of. Straight ahead guy, called 'em as he saw 'em.

[Nebr FAL owner]

Next time the cops should use the old stand-by of a couple of tube socks & a bar of soap . Then they can claim they were only trying to improve the standard of hygiene amongst the cretin's