Posted on 11/16/2006 4:57:59 AM PST by radar101
There seems to be a lot of cop haters on this thread.<<<<<
I would agree to a point, especially without more info. Police are advised of all sorts of information and intelligence that is not made public, so at this point, we don't know why they were so anxious to ID him.
The library guy may have done something suspicious or matched the description of someone else. All he had to do is follow the established rules and cooperate. Whether they acted properly, I don't know, sounds like overkill, but we don't know yet.
I agree completely.
:-)
Please post links to those other articles. The only other account I've seen is from AP and only quotes the spokesperson for the cops.
I'm just going by the information presented. Based on what we have here. The cops are the ones who committed a crime.
Your point is? You think battery is the proper punishment for not moving as fast as some cop wants you to move?
If a cop tells you to get out of your car and you don't get out of your car as fast as the cop thinks you should he should taser you?
"The CSO made an announcement that he would be checking for university identification. When a person, who was later identified as ... Tabatabainejad, refused to provide any identification, the CSO told him that if he refused to do so, he would have to leave the library.
"Since, after repeated requests, he would neither leave nor show identification, the CSO notified UCPD officers, who responded and asked Tabatabainejad to leave the premises multiple times. He continued to refuse. As the officers attempted to escort him out, he went limp and continued to refuse to cooperate with officers or leave the building.
Greenstein said Tabatabainejad encouraged others in the library to join his "resistance." She said a crowd gathered around the officers.
http://www.nbc4.tv/news/10325914/detail.html
Had the student left immediately as asked, before CSO called UCPD, there would also have been no story. He had plenty of time to leave in a reasonable manner. He didn't.
He, in fact, got exactly what he was seeking; a confrontation with authority. If the University was smart, they would expel him for a semester and institute a couple of required seminars on compliance with campus security and university rules for the students.
"When asked whether the student resisted when officer attempted to escort him from the building, the witness said, "In the beginning, no. But when they were holding onto him and they were on the ground, he was trying to just break free. He was saying, 'I'm leaving, I'm leaving.' It was so disturbing to watch that I cannot be concise on that. I can just say that he was willing to leave. He had his backpack on his shoulder and he was walking out when the cops approached him. It was unnecessary."
So if a cop tells you to get out of your car and you don't get out fast enough to please him, he should assault you and you should lose your license?
It sure appears that way.
And the student newspaper you are relying upon says "No university police officers were available to comment further about the incident as of 3 a.m. Wednesday, and no Community Service Officers who were on duty at the time could be reached."
And then provides an unsourced account of the incident followed by quotes from shocked students from the tail end of the incident. Were any students with a conflicting version not quoted? Did any of the quoted ones see the whole thing from beginning to end?
Misusing the English language is what DU does. I would hope FReepers have higher standards than that.
Gosh you are an obstinate anarchist, aren't you?
He became a trespasser when he refused to leave when so ordered by the campus authorities.
California Penal Code section 602.1. (a) Any person who intentionally interferes with any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner or agent of a business establishment open to the public, by obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or their customers, and who refuses to leave the premises of the business establishment after being requested to leave by the owner or the owner's agent, or by a peace officer acting at the request of the owner or owner's agent, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to 90 days, or by a fine of up to four hundred dollars ($400), or by both that imprisonment and fine.
(b) Any person who intentionally interferes with any lawful business carried on by the employees of a public agency open to the public, by obstructing or intimidating those attempting to carry on business, or those persons there to transact business with the public agency, and who refuses to leave the premises of the public agency after being requested to leave by the office manager or a supervisor of the public agency, or by a peace officer acting at the request of the office manager or a supervisor of the public agency, is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for up to 90 days, or by a fine of up to four hundred dollars ($400), or by both that imprisonment and fine.
When he refused to leave the premises after being asked to do so by the Campus Authorities, at that point he had committed the crime of trespassing. The officer had the right at that point to arrest him. Instead, he simply took the man by the arm in an attempt to assist him in leaving the premises. When he refused, he then committed a potential felony by resisting arrest.
California Penal Code section 148: (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
.
Now answer the question, are you a first year law student or just a naive anarchist?
What the hell is wrong with you people? The man was engaged in criminal behavior and you guys would tie the hands of the police to enforce the laws and and then punish those people who were simply doing their job to the best of their ability.
I am frankly ashamed that some of these opinions are here on free republic. They seem to be so much more in tune with those at Democrat Underground.
If a cop tells me to get out of my car, I say "Yes sir, I will be moving my hands from the wheel to unbuckle myself and open the door"
I do not verbally assault, bitch, whine or object to the request.
Had the student simply politely verbally agreed and then complied with the request to produce ID or leave there would also be no story.
You seem to think that freedom means the right to be uncivil. And of course, you are correct, you are free to be uncivil. But you do not have the right to be free from the consequences of your incivility. Act like an a$$hat, you get treated like one.
Bad manners are the enemy of a civilised society. Good manners are a free pass to the top. It's really that simple.
years of experience with the media? do you actually believe all they write? in my line of work (police officer) we are taught by the experienced officers that there are always 3 sides to every story: one person's side, the other person's side, and the truth.
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.