I got sidetracked tonight by the rather sobering story of a UCLA student who was Tasered multiple times by UCPD police in the university’s Powell Library. Read on for the facts and an eyewitness account from the student threatened by police on tape after asking for identification.
These facts were compiled from the Daily Bruin’s initial and subsequent coverage, the official report [pdf] of the UCLA police department, a shaky video of the incident shot by a student in the library and witness accounts:
- UCLA student Mostafa Tabatabainejad was working in the library when a Community Service Officer approached and asked him to show school ID as part of a posted library policy barring unauthorized persons after 11PM. Mostafa did not have his ID and did not leave immediately. It is unclear if he refused to leave and, if so, whether he was belligerent. The CSO contacted the campus police, which have the same authority as municipal cops.
- Multiple campus policemen arrived as Mostafa was apparently exiting the library. One of them put a hand on Mostafa, inciting him to shout angrily.
- An officer Tasered Mostafa using the “drive stun” setting (i.e. via direct contact instead of shooting).
- After placing Mostafa in handcuffs, officers continued to Taser Mostafa multiple times. Mostafa yelled that he was cooperating and that he had a medical condition. Officers ordered him to “stand up” repeatedly, which he did not do.
- At least two dozen students witnessed the event. Multiple students demanded badge numbers from the officers on scene and told them that they were out of line. At least one of the students requesting the information was threatened with the Taser directly.
There are polarized debates raging on Facebook, YouTube, Reddit, Digg and other sites over whether Mostafa did not stand up out of defiance or because the Taser incapacitated him, which is one possible effect of being Tasered for a prolonged period. Most people either believe Mostafa was intentionally being disobedient and got what he deserved, or that he was physically unable to stand up and was subsequently tortured by brutal or merely incompetent policemen.
I’m a firm believer in shades of gray. I do know that police work is unfathomably challenging and that many fine men and women carry it out honorably. I don’t know if Mostafa could stand up or not. I don’t know his initial demeanor toward the CSO or the cops since the video starts just after the police arrive. I don’t know if he actually has a medical condition.
What I do know is that I do not care, because irrespective of Mostafa’s intentions, there are two injustices here that no decent human being should tolerate.
The first is that a slight student surrounded by at least four policemen was Tasered at least three additional times after being handcuffed. If the cops believed Mostafa was consciously refusing to leave, they had more than enough manpower to lift him up and carry him out the nearby exit without risk of personal injury—which appears to be what they ultimately did anyway. The UCPD’s official account [pdf] neglects to acknowledge that Mostafa was restrained and also omits the number of times the Taser was actually used on him. Police Chief Karl Ross omitted this same information in his remarks to the press.
The second is that a student asking for police identification was directly threatened with a Taser—once on video, and once after the alleged “threat” of Mostafa had been defused and the situation was calmer. He’s the one in the white shirt near the end of the video.
I found this student through one of over a dozen Facebook groups that have emerged following the incident. This one was called “I forgot my BruinCard.. please don’t TASER me.” His name is Mher—he has asked that I not print his last name—and he told me his account.
You have the facts, whether or not you agree with my take on them. The UCLA police department and UCLA Chancellor Norman Abrams need to hear your opinion of how this situation was handled.
Update #2: The LA Times reports on the officer wielding the Taser.
Update: The UCPD has released its Taser policy.
Account from eyewitness UCLA student Mher (last name withheld):
The first thing I noticed was the student shout “don’t touch me” the very first time when he was still as his desk (a little earlier than when the camera began to roll I believe. I was about 30 feet away from him.) I hadn’t noticed the policemen come in. I looked over and I saw the student standing up, his hands were in the air in a very “get your hands off me” manner. One of the police officers did in fact have his hands on him and was grabbing one of his right arms, or maybe more but I didn’t pay too much attention to it right away (I was doing work on the computer). I returned to typing as it seemed that he was just going to escorted out. I thought the incident was over then and went back to my paper. A very short time later (maybe I’d estimate 30 secondsish) I heard him again, but this time farther down by the exit of the computer lab, shouting “don’t touch me” and soon after the shock.
I was stunned and I think most other people were stunned as well. One girl started trotting over from where I was and said “you can’t do that”. I got up soon after and walked over. I didn’t see what happened before the first shock, but I soon approached and saw him held on the ground by the officers and in the midst of being cuffed. I don’t know if he had been struggling up to this point, but when I got there he was pretty much subdued and the officers were doing the struggling (turning him over to finish cuffing him, manhandling him pretty much). He yelled a few things during this time and you can hear it all on the video. Then the officers were dragging him up from his arms and demanding that he stand up. He looked really messed up at this point, as if he had just ran a race or something. His face was kind of pinkish (probably from the shock and all the shouting) and his body was slumped. I started saying to him “get up dude, just get up”, and I think some other people may have been encouraging him. He wasn’t making a move and just about then they shocked him again.
At this point a couple of other students and I started shouting back at the cops. I hadn’t seen what led to the first shock, but I did see the time in between and the second shock was completely unjustifiable. He was definitely not being violent, he wasn’t moving, at all. A few of us were shouting as they led him down the stairway and shocked him right there going down and he fell pretty hard on the tiles of the steps (I think you can see him flying up on the video). They dragged him down to the entrance foyer and there I, and a couple other students became more vocal. The CSOs were trying to block us off at this point, but they were porous and few. Several students had been demanding badge numbers, but the 2 officers had obviously not responded up to that point, and never did. (The student was shocked AT LEAST two more times before he was finally dragged out of the building.)
In the foyer, there were a few other officers. One of them came to approach us. One other student and I started speaking with this officer, saying mostly 1) this student is being assaulted by these officers and you have to stop this and 2) we want the names and badge numbers of all the officers there. He told us that we would get them and that we needed to calm down. The student was pretty much motionless at this point except for the few times he was being tased. We continued complaining as the student was being dragged out, but he was badly obscured at this point by several officers and security guards. Then another officer approached me directly and told me to back up, to which I replied with some witty remark about the limits of his authority in the situation. He told me again to back up, and I said something like “I just want your badge numbers” and he told me again to back up right now and that if I didn’t move back I would be tased too. I didn’t move and looked at him directly, at which point he raised his taser gun and pointed it at me (I saw the red light glow right in the center of it) and said “try me”. I turned around and lifted my hands.
I walked around and approached the other officer I had talked to earlier. I again asked for badge numbers. One of the officers (can’t clearly remember which one or what number it was) responded with a single three digit number (which I am assuming was his own) and I saw the officer who had threatened me earlier walking out. I was held up for a couple seconds when the badge numbers of the two assaulting officers were given then walked out to follow the officer who had left. He was down below the stairs where there were about 5 police cars parked all facing the library. I trotted down and he immediately started approaching me. I said “I want your badge number”. He continued approaching me and pointed his taser gun at me again and told me to go back inside.
I walked back inside and started talking to people. I kept asking if anyone got all their badge numbers. One student assured me that he had gotten them. The whole place was buzzing at this point. People were talking, discussing, encouraging each other about doing things about it (which including calling news sources, writing to the chancellor, the regents, and the police department, etc.) It was here as I was talking to people that I first discovered that the initial violation had been that he didn’t show identification. I persistently asked everyone I talked to if the officers had ever stated that they were arresting the student or if rights had been read. I even spoke to the student who was sitting near him when the officers first approached. Everyone of the students I spoke to said that they had heard no mentions of arrest or Miranda rights. We pieced the story together, bits and pieces, there among us all.
I went back and packed all my stuff and went for a coffee at the vending machines and made a call out to someone I knew from the daily bruin. When I returned another student was being kicked out of the library for an unrelated event by the two officers I had spoken to. I recognized the student and greeted him. They were very rude to both of us and continued to be as they got his information and eventually left. I went back in and finished what work I had to do and eventually went home.
November 17th, 2006 at 3:27 am
The threats against someone trying to find out who a police officer is (to report misconduct) is one of the reasons police uniforms in the UK include the number on the shoulder epaulette. Then as long as someone is close enough to get a decent pic (probably closer than the video on youtube), or just read the number, they can identify the officer when making a complaint. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collar_number)
November 17th, 2006 at 5:00 am
Thank you Blake for posting that information - straight from the horse’s mouth as it were - without a media bias. The UCPD’s side of the story is very different from the student eyewitness accounts.
November 17th, 2006 at 5:51 am
This is an extremely well-prepared report, thank you very much.
The thing I fear most is that modern students are so jaded that this will be forgotten in a couple of days. This needs a very strong (while peaceful) response from the local community.
Back in the 60s students knew how to stand up…
I also sort of wish someone there had the courage let themselves be tased for asking the badge number. That would drive the point home.
November 17th, 2006 at 6:21 am
Bruce: The problem with the number on the epaulettes is that you can’t see it if you are on the ground. At Stonehenge on the Summer Solstice in 1988 there were several incidents of people being bundled to the ground and given a good kicking by groups of police officers, but they were unable to make a complaint as they weren’t able to see the numbers of the officers responsible for the assault.
Still, in previous years at Stonehenge people had made complaints against officers only to be told that no officer had that number, or that the officer with that number hadn’t been on duty; it was (is?) common practice when a group of officers were preparing to participate in a planned confrontation for them to swap individual digits around within the group so as to make themselves unidentifiable. As complaints against the British police can only be made about a specific officer or officers, this practise effectively permits the police both individually and as a body to act in any way they wish without fear of retribution.
November 17th, 2006 at 8:57 am
Thats complete bullshit. I am assuming the guy is a student who forgot his ID card. If it is, the police are in some deep-er shit. They tased him at least 4 fucking times from what i counted. I mean, look at when they tased him prior to going down the stairs! Thats uncalled for. He was in cuffs, wasn’t moving, and they were fucking yelling at him the entire time. “Gosh officer, I’d sure like to move for you, but my legs are a bit numb”…
Thank god for the video, countless eyewitness accounts, and the numerous pictures people took with their cellphones. Oh, and if is person asks for an officers badge number, aren’t they legally required to present it? Either way, video, pictures, eye witness accounts, those cops are screwed. They were screwed the minute they put him in handcuffs and then tased him repeatedly.
Lol, and people wonder why cops have such bad reps.
November 17th, 2006 at 9:12 am
I watched the video and the eyewitness account agrees with what I saw in the video to a T. This student was tortured while clearly in custody and of no threat to himself or others.
I have little doubt that these officers will not only be dismissed by the department with extreme predjudice but will also face federal prosecution for violating his civil rights. Additionally, this student should and most likely will sue the police officers individually, the department, and the university.
The individual officers will be liable for their excessive use of force and violation of federally protected civil rights. Further, since the video shows the officers threatening bystanders who demanded that they identify themselves as law enforcement, it is debatable whether these officers were even acting as officers of the peace at all; the argument can be made that they were in effect a posse of private citizens impersonating police officers and forcefully kidnapping someone.
The department is clearly culpable due to it’s failure to provide adequate leadership and training; additionally, a command culture which allows officers to threaten bystanders with force (lethal or non lethal) who demand that they identify themselves as law enforcement is accountable for the actions of its officers.
The university is culpable for failing to set stringent guidlines for the use of force on campus–the idea that someone who forgets their student ID should be tased at all is ludicrous especially once already in cuffs and surrounded by four police officers.
The best thing for the bystanders to have done would have been to dial 911 and tell the operator that 4 men impersonating police officers were brandishing weapons in the university library and dragging away students. At the same time, while some on this forum have derided the student response as weak, I would say the exact opposite. It takes some strong measure of courage to stand up to a group of 4 trigger-happy police officers who have already shown a willingness to use excessive force and demand that they identify themselves–several students in the video did this and should be applauded for not simply hiding in a cubicle (one poster’s suggestion that they should have rioted is patently ridiculous; all of these men will likely go to prision anyway for this incident).
The university president needs to not only unequivocally support this student, but needs to send a strong message to the student body that violent bands of maurading “peace” officers will not be tolerated. Only by strongly repudiating this obscene action can the university save itself from the lawsuit it is likely going to lose.
I know from studying at other universities that there is usually an extensive camera system in the library, especially in the lobby where it appears that most of this incident took place. At Columbia University, for example, the network is so comprehensive that periodic security announcements to the student body would actually show the face of the person stealing a laptop from the vantage of a library camera and ask for aid in identifying the perpetrator. I would assume that a large university like UCLA also has such a system.
In short, eveyone involved, except for the student, is probably screwed. Heads will roll because of this, and rightly so.
November 17th, 2006 at 10:02 am
I thought shooting people was the norm in the USA?
November 17th, 2006 at 10:22 am
“Try me!”
November 17th, 2006 at 11:46 am
CNN has an article up…the police/school seem to be avoiding any mentioning of the police’s abuse of power;
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/16/student.stunned.ap/index.html
November 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pm
Anyone else read that CNN story and have to think about who’s side they’re on? Its obviously a dangerous encroachment on people’s rights and an obvious misuse of authority, so why does it sound like the one who wrote the article has friends in the UCLA police?
“Lets see.. gotta make this sound as limp and commonplace as possible.. can’t link a video or anything like that because then people will see how bad it really is… hmm..”
November 17th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
Posters are right about one thing, tho: it was complete bull shyt.
and totally staged.
November 17th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
Wow. I take it all of the posters here are young collegians living in blue states, right?
You’ve got to be kidding me. Half of what’s being spewing is bullsht.
1. Of course the department and school are going to avoid official or unofficial statements until they can get all of the facts, and make a well-educated statement. Many a reputation and lawsuit have been lost because of an ary word. How the fck can you take that as dodging the situation? Are you that stupid, or just acting the part?
“The university is culpable for failing to set stringent guidlines for the use of force on campus–the idea that someone who forgets their student ID should be tased at all is ludicrous especially once already in cuffs and surrounded by four police officers.”
Out of context bullsht. And you know it, too. Those officers needed to make a report on the disturbance, and they needed to talk to this student. Had they not stopped him by grabbing his arm, he would’ve just walked out of the library. Then what? The cops just go back to their department, and when the chief asks for the report, they say: “Gee, captain, we asked him to stop, but he wouldn’t, so there was nothing that we could do, because we can’t touch anyone without it being assault.”
This is a case of arresting an unruly student. Plain and simple
“The best thing for the bystanders to have done would have been to dial 911 and tell the operator that 4 men impersonating police officers were brandishing weapons in the university library and dragging away students.”
I actually laughed when I read this. It’s so amazingly rediculous. I think that you know why those police officers didn’t offer up their badge numbers and names, you’re just not saying it. They were dealing with an angry mob, which is clearly evident in the video. At how many riots do you see the riot control offering up their numbers to the unruly crowd? OH! None? Perhaps the rioting crowd should call 911 and tell them that there are people down here impersonating riot control and macing. RIght then and there, they’re dealing with prospective perpetrators, so they’re on guard, and that time is not the one to hand out information and make friends.
Everything, including the officers’ names and badge numbres would be included in the official report, available for public view.
————–
I’m not coming back to this blog, but if anyone wants to talk/argue/get owned by me, please feel free to e-mail me at Godlaus@u.washington.edu
November 17th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
The current sickness of America is an inability to challenge or even question authority. The Chancellor of UCLA is a pro Patr-idiot Act author who believes that because of that “Act”, all Americans are required to carry ID at all times. What’s worse is that is probably true. Your country has gone to hell. Your Constitution is now next to meaningless. You have fewer individual rights now concerning your individual freedoms than you had under British rule before the American Revolution. Big Brother is your new god. I wish I could say I feel sorry for you all but I don’t. You all deserve this because of your morbid wussiness when facing any form of authority.
November 17th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
The police has the right to ask for identification. But they should have enough common sence to take command of their suspects in a calm and peaceful maner. All I can conclude from the video is that the police had lost control over the self-generated and embarecing situation. Let’s imagine that the suspect was a mentally retarded person. Does he deserve to be treated like that? Where there any other ways of handeling the situation that would have ended peacefuly? If there is then why did they not use that prior to use of Taser?
November 17th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Either Godlaus is a good troll, or a huge redneck. It’s up in the air! ^ ~
November 17th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
I’m not sure about the first students incident but from the description of the second student the officer was justified in the threat to taser him.
Beyond simply showing a threat,violence, you are supposed to comply with police orders even if you aren’t doing anything wrong. I can easially see how a small number of officers would feel that the situation is getting out of control.
Don’t make “witty” remarks to police officers when they are beginning to be surrounded by a group of people. Don’t refuse to follow orders unless they are unreasonable. I guess that kind of sense is uncommon. If the eyewitness actually complied by steping back a few steps I’d feel different.
This was very poor judgement on the witnesses part.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:44 pm
Is it not clear to anyone else that this is a situation of profiling. Let’s see, what was this guys name anyways…oh yeah, “Mostafa Tabatabainejad.” For some reason I don’t think he is the blond hair, blue eye type.
It seems quite possible to me that the officers were “tense” and “worried” at the possibility of a terror act. The guy seems the “type” and he had a “package (backpack).” The officers sounded pretty green to me; like they had really never handled a “potentially disasterous” situation. Panic. Simple panic on the part of the officers.
Why didn’t anyone have the balls to stand up to the officers. Not saying I would (I would have been more worried about reprecussions [explusion] than actually getting tased) but it sure would have sent a clear message to the world when someone “innocent” was harmed instead of creating this subjective pile of muddy muck.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Police do have the right to ask for identification, but there’s no legal requirement to provide it when asked.
The lack of identification has NOTHING to do with this case. Yes, Virginia, it is legal to be out of the house after dark without your papers.
November 17th, 2006 at 3:41 pm
People reacting to this are all idealist. So what!!! HE BROKE THE RULES EVEN IF HE WAS A STUDENT, TOUGH! KEEP IT REAL!
The Cops were obviously remaining calm, the guy being tased escalated the situation. See, police have protocol for most every situation for their safety because of precedent.
What does the Patriot Act have to do with anything? The Patriot Act was NOT renewed, therefore does not make it relevant.
Read response #14 from Godlaus, he keeps it real. If you can not comprehend the reasoning, you are not keeping it real. What would happen at a University in a 3rd World Nation? He probably would have been beaten or murdered. Tasers hurt for a only a short amount of time and are a non-lethal method of force. The stats you read about deaths as a result of Taser use are most likely from the use of Tasers that are cheap and not made properly.
KEEP IT REAL! Rules Are Rules, You face the consequences by not following those rules, and you control the severity of the consequences by the manner you carry yourself when dealing with authority.
November 17th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
This is on digg.com, from the Tucker Max boards. URL is
http://messageboard.tuckermax.com/showthread.php?t=12336
Always find all the eyewitnesses you can before coming up with an opinion. There is also a purported cell phone video that is 7 minutes long–way too long for a cell phone. The previous altercation was conveniently not included so that your mind will already be made up the way somebody else wants it. Lets see, liars, damned liars, statistics, and now video.
Okay kids, I’m here!
Yes, I was indeed at Powell Library at approximately 11:30 on Tuesday night, and yes I did see the entire event as it went down.
Let me start off by saying that the guy DEFINITELY was asking to get his ass kicked. He was being extremely rude with the campus patrol guys (who are college students…this was before the real UCPD got called in). He was not complying with their requests to leave the premises, and he was definitely itching for a fight. I actually know the guy and a few of his friends, and I can tell you that he’s the kind of guy that loves to make trouble.
Just as a little backstory, one of the quotes the guy has on his facebook (which he now has taken down) was “I like to find the most difficult solutions to the simplest of problems”.
He definitely taunted the UCPD into behaving the way they did with him.
Edit: Many people have questioned the fact that the cops tazed him and asked him to get up, and tazed him again even though he shouldn’t have the capability to get up. This was not the case here to my knowledge, because the cops were using their “drive-stun” method which administers less of a jolt than normal. I believe this because anyone who can ramble on about this being the patriot act and yell at the top of his lungs should have the capability of getting up.
——————————————————————————–
November 17th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
**********************************************
You know, this would not be the issue if the guy was a poor black man or woman, because there have been tons of videos on the internet of people being tazed and this one’s getting all the attention.
People watch the other video where the person is obviously resistant and in the same situation, and no controversy.
If this guy was a big black drug dealer, everyone would silently agree to the justification of tazing. Why? Because they can relate to this student more?
Second - torture my ass. All cops have to be tased several times as part of training. If the guy didn’t want to be tazed, all he had to do was stand up. People pretending to be experts for tasing and saying he can’t are full of crap.
Legally they have the right to tase in the case of resistance, whether passive or aggressive (in this case, passive-aggressive).
**********************************************
November 17th, 2006 at 4:49 pm
It’s a clear cut case of authority out of control. Let’s get back to the fundamentals; a student did not have an ID card in his possession. That it ended the way it has shows the police to be arrogant fools with far too much power who have lost sight of their real responsibilities.
In my day, if the cops had pulled a stunt like this the student body would have run the lot of them off the campus, tasers or no tasers.
November 17th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
Joseph,
I agree that a “witty” remark was not in the best judgment (although I commend Mher for admitting he made it; he could easily have left it out of his account).
However, note that even after Mostafa was taken out of the building and things had calmed down, the officer again threatened Mher in response to his request for a badge number. Furthermore, according to Mher’s account, the *officer* approached him. It’s difficult to claim that the officer felt threatened by Mher’s proximity if he was actively moving toward him. Read the end of the account closely.
November 17th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
KT,
It seems hypocritical to deride others for acting as Taser experts and then immediately assume the role of a criminal law expert in asserting that the use of force here was legal. Point us to the relevant statutes so we can all examine the same laws you apparently are looking at.
November 17th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
All i know is even if Mostafa started it, he just had electricity shot into his body…there was absolutely no need to taser him a second, third, and fourth time just to get him to stand up. Also, why were there so many cops (and cars) if it was only for 1 person?
November 17th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
If you are considering only two points, you should also consider the officer’s point of view. They do not know whether or not Mostafa Tabatabainejad was armed or not. He could have any sort of weapon, lethal or otherwise. A weapon will level a playing field, no matter how many people are involved. Even if he didn’t have a weapon, one cannot “simply” remove a person. He may have even been hopped on on PCP and may have physically fought with the officers, even with broken bones or bullet wounds. There are far to many variables. Forcibly removing someone is far more dangerous then tazoring them, especially when it comes to a person who is out to be the martyr, as it seems this person was.
Another point to consider is that, Mr. Tabatabainejad was obviously not restrained. He was not cuffed until shortly before he was removed from the building. He was standing up straight and was moving with quick motions. All this implies that the tazoring was not all that bad for him. Tazoring only incapacitates a person for a very short while, and the fact that he was yelling out at people to defend him makes it seem as if the tazoring really didn’t hurt him.
Also the fact that he was trying to incite other students into violence makes his case worse, both at the time of the incident in dealing with the officers, and now. If there is a chance or a situation erupting into something worse, more drastic measures are to be taken to stop that. And still, it seems as if the officers were being to easy on him.
As for your other point, verbally attacking an officer as he is trying to incapacitate a beligerant person is only helping to contribute to the problem. In fact, that can be taken as an illegal act, in that you are (can’t remember the actual lingo), helping the suspect in their illegal activity.
One note though, notice how Mr. Tabatabainejad goes limp as he is carried out, right before that he seems fine. The report, even if it is missing a few items, still seems to contain reliable information. At least until the investigation is carried out.
November 17th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
One small comment on police too. In my country, it is required for officers to do things in pairs. This lowers fatality and injury rates among officers. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the same at UCLA. In fact, 4 officers would be normal if anything.
But some of you are right. Instead of tazoring them on the low voltage setting (the drive-stun, which obviously did nothing), perhaps they should have incapacitated him by shooting him (with the tazor).
November 17th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
typo-
county, not country
November 17th, 2006 at 5:43 pm
Shawn,
You wrote:
“Verbally attacking an officer as he is trying to incapacitate a beligerant person is only helping to contribute to the problem. In fact, that can be taken as an illegal act, in that you are (can’t remember the actual lingo), helping the suspect in their illegal activity.”
I find this irrelevant in two ways. The first is that the officer being asked for his badge number was not participating in the incapacitation of Mostafa. The second is that Mher was threatened with a Taser even after Mostafa was removed.
November 17th, 2006 at 6:07 pm
I’m appalled by this, and by the comments that rationalize the brutal actions of these community employees. This was an American student. Born in America. Minding his own business. Tazered. Repeatedly. For minding his own business. Disgusting.
November 17th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
Elessar,
There were probly multiple cop cars because each cop arrived seperately. They could’ve been cruising for speeders or whatever cops do, got a call on the radio, and all responded seperately.
November 17th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
But there were at least 4 officers around Mostafa after he was cuffed, and yet they still tased him…why? It wasn’t called for, simple as that.
November 17th, 2006 at 7:33 pm
As far as Im concerned, cops are not gods. Ive heard of so many incidents from friends, and experienced them myselves, where cops are just insulting and rude. Is that what they are there for? And anyone who happens to have a backbone, and decides to respond to them, is automaticall “endagering” them and therefore they need to be hurt or arrested. I am so sick of this. I am so sick of the police. EVERY single coworker I have (and they are college-educated professionals, I dont work at McDonalds, not that there is anything wrong with that, but anyway)they all say they HATE cops. Literally hate them. Half the time they approach you they bully you. My incident with the police, when I started truly hating them, was when I called them for help against my abusive boyfriend, who was throwing things and yelling in front of me and my infant son. I dont want to go there, but I have never gotten over the way the cops treated ME. The reason I even mentioned this is because I want to make it clear that even if you are COMPLETELY law-abiding, and just calling them for help, they WILL abuse you. I wish I had had the courage to do something about it back then, but obviously I had problems at home, and didnt have it in me to do anything. Now its too late, it was so long ago. But seeing this incident just brought it all back…
November 17th, 2006 at 7:36 pm
I wasn’t commenting on that part, just about why there would be four cars there
November 17th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
Shawn. There were way too many mistakes in your comments to ignore. Listen carefully.
1. There’s such a thing as reasonable cause and the 4th amendment. They did not know if Mostafa had a weapon or not. That does not mean that they can assume he has one. The officers also didn’t know if any of those witnesses had guns. Does that mean that they all should have been cuffed and escorted? Not adding up. Law of parsimony (Occam’s razor) says the most simple explanation is usually the correct one. I’m guessing that a college student (or anyone for that matter) writing a paper at 1130 during midterms in the university library is not gonna have a weapon on him. Same thing goes with the drugs. Please cut the garbage.
2. You talk about Mostafa not being restrained and him walking on his own. WRONG. The only time he walked on his own was BEFORE he was tasered. He wasn’t cuffed ’shortly before’ he was removed. You’re wrong again. Watch the video, read the witness account, more than half of the time he is in the foyer, well after he was cuffed. Please stop twisting things. He was cuffed before the second shock, before he was dragged down the stairs into the foyer. And where in the world do you see him moving with quick motions? Now you’re just making shit up. Which video are you watching? Which witness account are you reading dude?
3. You say he was inciting students to defend him. Again, where in the world are you getting this man? Do you hear him address the students even once in this video?
4. This is to the other genius up there somewhere who thinks he’s got some kind of authority on how our nervous system works. He was able to shout so that makes him capable of getting up? Can I see your neurology license before you tell me more please. The muscles in your face are controlled by a wholy different system than your extremities my friend. Cranial nerves vs. spinal nerves. Look it up on wikipedia or something first and know what your talking about. Ever wonder why people never become paralyzed in the face(aside from being poisoned), but always some part below their neck?
November 17th, 2006 at 9:50 pm
“What I do know is that I do not care, because irrespective of Mostafa’s intentions, there are two injustices here that no decent human being should tolerate.”
I agree 112%. This incident is despicable. I’ll be following it and spreading the word by mouth to everyone possible. These types of BLATANT infringements of civil rights and freedoms, and abuses fo power can not be tolerated by any society.
November 17th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
I wasn’t there, and the very little you can see in the video of what happened doesn’t even start when the incident started, so I can’t say anything for sure about this incident. I also know that any “witness account” doesn’t prove anything. I read somewhere that there were at least 2 dozen witnesses, may be even more than that from what the video looks like. The foyer looks pretty full of people, but I’m sure the witness accounts of every one of those people will tell a different story. None of them are lying, their perceptions are just skewed by their own life histories and prejudices. But I can tell you that while some cops are terrible, some are great. I’ll relate a couple of stories here:
First, a bad cop story. When I was younger and still living with my mom and her boyfriend who had been living with us for 10 years, I called the police one day because my mom’s boyfriend had told my mom (in front of like 5 or 6 of her coworkers) that he was going to kill me. About a week before he had pulled a gun on me, so when my mom called and told me, I was pretty worried. So I called the cops, hoping they’d send one to my house just in case my mom’s boyfriend did come to kill, I’d at least have some protection (and I don’t need to hear anything about how I should protect myself, this was several years ago). The cops told me that because my mom’s boyfriend lived there, they couldn’t do anything. I made a sarcastic remark, “Should I call you back after he comes and kills me?” The cop said I should.
On a positive note, earlier this year, or late last year, I don’t remember for sure which, I was biking home from work, and got pulled over because I didn’t have lights on my bike (I get off work at midnight, so it was pretty dark out). My tail light was out because the batteries died that morning, and I just didn’t have a headlight (it was removable, and I’d lost it). The cop was nice the entire time, even when I reached into my coat for my ID (He got a little scared at that, it was a big coat, and I could easily have been reaching for a weapon, since I didn’t tell him what I was doing). I live in a city where cops are known to shoot first, ask questions later…we’ve had cops shoot people with umbrellas (we get nearly as much rain as Seattle, WA), with toy guns (that one’s not so bad), and completely unarmed. With how trigger happy our cops our, I was impressed at not getting shot, but moreso that the cop who pulled me over was nice the entire time.
So even in a city of trigger-happy cops, some of them are nice. I do think this sitation was pretty ridiculous. I’m interested to see what’ll go down after it.
November 17th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
you people seem to forget, (or dont want to publish) that this asshat was approached by a Community Service Officer, a student that works part time for the university as campus “security”.
just outside of the library there is a sign that states that no one with out an ID is allowed inside the library after 2300hrs.
the CSO approached this clown AFTER they made an announcement about doing an ID check. This guy refused to show his or identify himself.
he was asked to leave by the CSO. he REFUSED. the CSO called the police.
when the police arrived, they again asked for ID. the subject AGAIN REFUSED to show ID. he was asked to leave, AGAIN he refused. here is where he violated a SECOND LAW. the first being in the library AFTER 2300 without proper ID.
the police went to escort him out with physical contact on his arm. he decided to make a scene, fine.
the real problem arises when he decides to use passive aggressive resistance on the police by going limp. (this is what Mehr’s statements speaks to. rememebr, even Mehr says he goes LIMP BEFORE the first taser is applied)
this asshat then decides to worsen the situation by calling on the mass of 20-30 students to join him in the resistance. he is now trying to incite a riot against 2-3 police officers.
the officers, following the use of force guidelines, applied the taser to end the passive resistance through pain compliance. the taser also had a second, more pshycological affect of shocking the crowd out of any thoughts of joining or starting a riot.
this Mehr idiot wasn’t “threatened” with the taser as much as he was warned. the police were well aware of actor trying to incite the riot. they reacted quickly and took control of the situation. Mehr was warned against interferring or obstructing justice. if he had a serious grievance with the officers actions, he could have easily gotten all the info he wished the next day or filed a complaint with Internal Affairs. instead, he chose to confront an officer that had just faced a potentially riotous crowd. he did so in an almost threatening manner by gesticulating with his nads and arms in the officers face.
the officer gave him plenty of time and warnings to step back. he only did so AFTER being warned of possible taser use. so, the taser actually had 3 uses, two of them being pshycological.
of course, i will be flamed by the tree-hugging liberals here. all the Berkley fucktards and such. they will ignore the simple fact that all this actor had to do was COMPLY with either the CSO or the police by showing an ID which, the other 20-30 students had no problem doing or, leaving the building.
simple as that.
November 17th, 2006 at 10:58 pm
sixer70,
Where did I “forget” the facts you mention? I summarized everything you said at the very beginning of the post. Please explain.
November 17th, 2006 at 10:59 pm
oh man, third para. from end, i said threatening with his “nads” when i meant sto type “hands” WTF????
ahh my k/b is fookering up
November 17th, 2006 at 11:02 pm
well, you write a pretty slanted piece against the police officers. you offer this “bystanders” statement as Holy Mana while giving an underlying castigation of the police officers just from the tone of your piece alone.
how about for once, just once, siding with the police on an issue.
had this guy been some rapist creep or stalker that injured or killed a person on campus and later have been found out to be in the library w/o ID, you would all be on here bitching about how the CSO’s and police did NOT do their jobs!
November 17th, 2006 at 11:03 pm
also, your “facts” state that the cops arrived as he was leaing the building. then, you have Mehr’s account that puts him at his desk being confronted by the police.
November 17th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
First of all, you didn’t address the question. You said I didn’t include the facts, but there they are, right at the top.
Second, it’s true that I offered my take on the situation (welcome to my weblog). I also explicitly appealed to people to use their *own* judgment and come to their *own* conclusions based on the facts.
Third, I didn’t glorify the account in any way as “Holy Mana”. I simply called it what it is: an eyewitness account. I think it’s rather balanced to offer an eyewitness account given that I also linked to the police account.
Fourth, I urge you to consider that perhaps not every issue can be neatly divided into two sides. I have already acknowledged that Mostafa was wrong not to provide ID and that we don’t know how much of what we see on the video is theatrical. I then suggested that irrespective of that, the police still used excessive force.
Do you allow any room for the possibility that perhaps BOTH parties were wrong?
November 17th, 2006 at 11:22 pm
Sixer70: You’re right; there does seem to be a discrepancy there. Note that the facts state that Mostafa was “apparently” exiting the library. I based that on other witness accounts, as did the Daily Bruin story (”the student had begun to walk toward the door”). Perhaps Mher, who was 30 feet away, was mistaken. Perhaps Mostafa was still in the area of his desk but was standing and preparing to leave. Or perhaps Mostafa was not in fact leaving at all.
Either way, I’ve already acknowledged Mostafa’s transgressions. My focus now is on the police force that was used and the threats made to students asking for badge numbers. Now that I’ve expressed my views on Mostafa’s behavior, will you express yours on the cops’ with respect to the UCPD Taser policy that binds them?
November 18th, 2006 at 12:01 am
Hi. First a bit of disclosure. I’m a UCLA alum that while as student worked as both a CSO Supervisor and an Staff Photographer for the Daily Bruin (fun juggling those two jobs). Anyhow, I wanted to say that of any of the published reporting so far of which I’ve read tons (and I’ve been FAR too wrapped up in this), this is the place where I have seen the best attempt at fairness overall (this including the Bruin coverage).
However, I find myself not as outraged as the majority of the people. There are many questions unaswered and some decrepancies in accounts as Mr. Ross as points. However, I can see how this can end with this being deemed in policy with no serious fault in the officers actions.
I’ve asked my self many times in the last day if this is because I’ve worked very closely with the UCPD (In fact, towards the end of the video, the Asian officer that comes in and calmly talks to the students was a senior CSO when I was a freshman years ago). On there other side, I’ve seen some of out of hand police in my capacity as a photojournalist. I’ve tried to look at this as objectively as I can and I honestly don’t think you can draw conclusions yet either way.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:19 am
yes, glad to.
and let me put this out there. thank you for the open and candid discussion. i am looking at a couple other sites that have degenerated into name calling. i do NOT want that to happen here. intelligent, point and fact driven discussion is what i am looking for.
First off, Mehr was not “threatened”. as a police officer i can assure you that one of the first thigns on oure minds is the presence of cameras. this is unfortunate b/c it really limits our reactions to situations b/c of the very real human instinct to re-think every action we take. this can and DOES lead to officer deaths. in alot of situations, there is NO time to think, you react or take PROactive measures to insure your and your partners safety.
secondly, these officers had to deal with this actor calling for help in “resisting” the police. this is an attempt to incite a riot, a felony in most states. the cops used the taser for several reasons. i will submit that the first and foremost was to control the actor, the second/third being to control the crowd and more aggressive individuals.
these cops were put into an explosive situation. they had seconds to react. they made a decision, right or wrong in your opinion, they made it and took action. they did this with NO malice but, with nothign but the purest, most expedient intents in mind.
in the end a riot was curtailed and the actor was taken into custody with ZERO injury and ZERO permanent injury. could the same have been said had the cops physically dragged this guy out of a building on the ground? or even in a suspended state while hand-cuffed or hog-tied while resisting? hand-cuffing and hog-tieing offer their own dangers of nerve damage.
what it ALL boils down to is the ACTORS own personal actions. HIS ACTIONS and HIS ACTIONS alone are/were the main controlling factors in this whole debacle.
had he simply complied with the posted rules by having his ID for a COMMON ID check. this would be a non-issue. had he had his ID to show to the CSO, this would be a non-issue. had he left the library when the CSO requested it after informing him of the ID rules. this would be a non-issue. had he produced ID when the Police asked for it, this would be a non-issue. had he left when the Police requested it, this would be a non-issue. had he NOT felt the need to cause a scene worthy of an Oscar (which are cheap scince the Washington/Berry wins BTW) this would have been a non-issue. had he complied after the first or, even SECOND application of the taser, this would be a non-issue.
instead, this passive-resistive activist chose a path of martyrdom that has lead to this impass.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:31 am
Thank you, sixer! This was a clear case of cops being attacked. The guy went LIMP, for god’s sake. What more of an excuse do they need to blow his brains out? (Not that they need an excuse, mind you, if they’re bored and want to go outside for a little target practice, that suffices). You people should be congratulating them on their restraint. Going limp in concert with not being sweet is grounds for the death penalty under CA law, yet this guy still lives. And don’t forget about the part where he tried to recruit all the other students to attack the cops. Okay, that didn’t happen, but it could have! Maybe he used telepathy. Never forget, you don’ have any rights, so never claim you do or it will go hard with you.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:35 am
Sixer70: I wasn’t aware you were an officer. If you don’t mind, I have a question. There has been plenty of speculation in forums and in the media that the “actor” as you call him possibly could not have gotten up if he wanted to since he was tased.
UCPD did not use tasers when I was there and even on the Taser Intl website, it doesn’t specify the differences clearly.
I know they used the “drive-stun” mode and it’s been mentioned that it possibly has less of an effect as “dart mode.” In the UCLA policy, it certainly intimates it’s less likely to immobilize someone for an extended period of time as it’s usage has different criteria. Can you clarify the differences? Is it possible that even in “drive-stun,” it could have debilitated him?
November 18th, 2006 at 1:06 am
eejit: We were trying to have a sarcasm free discussion here. At least I thought so and why I’m following this and not digg, or some of the other community sites.
“And don’t forget about the part where he tried to recruit all the other students to attack the cops. Okay, that didn’t happen, but it could have!”
Besides the whole “This is your Partiot act, this is your f##cking abuse of power” shout at the top of his lungs, he does call out “Will no one stop these people?”
November 18th, 2006 at 1:22 am
Honestly, why do people keep saying that the student was trying to incite a riot?
Can someone please PLEASE, please, pretty pease point to some evidence of this? i dont get it.
November 18th, 2006 at 1:27 am
Sixer70 and other supporters of torture for assholes:
1. There is no jurisdiction in the United States in which it is legal for officers in the field to use violent force or deliberate application of pain in response to “passive agressive resistance”, ie going limp.
2. The only sanctioned use of tasers in any mode by officers in the field is to avert immanent harm. The recent reported action of 4 UCLA officers using tasers in subduing a mental patient armed with scissors and threatening people is an example where one could justify tasers. Grappling with the man to subdue has immanent danger due to the scissors. Pushing someone’s hands off of one’s arm is not an indicator of being an immanent threat, let alone refusing to move after being handcuffed, as the UC lawyers are going to make very clear to their clients when they settle up with the victim.
3. Back when I was a kid torture was defined as appliction of pain to get information or compliance. I simply can’t accept that to
November 18th, 2006 at 1:55 am
the main difference in “Deployed” and “Drive-Stun” Mode is that in “deployed”, the contacts are actually “shot” out of the gun, stick into the targets skin and then are electrically charged.
in “Drive-Stun”, the contact remain attached to the gun but are still energized.
the taser gun is viewed as a non-lethal, level 3, use of force tactic. it is more desirable to officers over the common OS/CS pepper gas and baton holds.
it is also more desirable than physical handholds or armlocks, some of which require the use of a baton (straight/PR-24) to affect. the simple reason for this is minor and more permanent injuries are more prevalent with these types of restraits as opposed to taser actuated compliance.
now i know i sound like some industry spokesman, let me assure i am not in any way/shape/form a spokesman for any company or dept. that employs/advocates or promotes any company or its specific components used to assure compliance. if I am given a tool, i will use it to it’s utmost ability. i WILL ABUSE the TOOL, NOT the subject.
that being said, i am a full on supporter of police the world round. IF the police have employed a tactic that most ppl will interpret as wis-use of force, i will most always side for the balance of the Law Enforcement Officers (LEO’s).
that being said, this UCLA case will become a long, drawn out case due simply to the fact that multiple law school students will want to cut their teeth on such a juicy and prevalent/public issue as this case WILL turn out to be. That scares me for those officers and their families. These are guys that acted not out of mailce, but, out of genuine concern for legitimate students for UCLA.
these officers acted in GOOD FAITH, so ANY Mistakes of LAW SHOULD be excused under that provision if nothign else, unless of course California is so far gone as to condemn it’s protectors………..
November 18th, 2006 at 2:04 am
eejit Says:
November 18th, 2006 at 12:31 am
Thank you, sixer! This was a clear case of cops being attacked. The guy went LIMP, for god’s sake. What more of an excuse do they need to blow his brains out? (Not that they need an excuse, mind you, if they’re bored and want to go outside for a little target practice, that suffices). so, how EXACTLY would you describe a “passive-resistive” state?
You people should be congratulating them on their restraint.
as a police officer, yes! i do commend them for their restraint! they could’ve easily beat this asshat senseless. INSTEAD, they used a NON-LETHAL, NON-PERMANENT Use of Force Method to ensure COMPLIANCE with ofiicial police demands.
Going limp in concert with not being sweet is grounds for the death penalty under CA law, yet this guy still lives.
yet a man can brutally hack two people to death, can molest countless children and claim “racism” and nothing is done. Going “Limp” is a very PROMINENT SIGN of “PASSIVE-RESISTANCE”, just ask all the 60’s-70’s era Hippie Heroes your type of people like to enshrine!
And don’t forget about the part where he tried to recruit all the other students to attack the cops. Okay, that didn’t happen, but it could have! Maybe he used telepathy. Never forget, you don’ have any rights, so never claim you do or it will go hard with you.
you DO have rights! But, they end as soon as you endanger someone else.
November 18th, 2006 at 2:14 am
uhhhh Mirror, just because you’re an IDIOT of the highest accord, or maybe it is EARLY/LATE in your part of the world, here is a DIRECT LINK TO THE UCLA POLICE DEPt.’s
“POLICY FOR TASER USE”
please, please please, READ IT, then copy it in CRAYON so that you and other liberal idiots from Kalifornia may understand it in it’s full entirety.
so much for “no use of force guidelins for tasers…….”
PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO PAGE 3, SUB 6, LINE B.
now you can explain how it feels to be made a fool of………..
November 18th, 2006 at 2:16 am
Can we keep the discussion civil please?
November 18th, 2006 at 2:20 am
Qualia: “Honestly, why do people keep saying that the student was trying to incite a riot? Can someone please PLEASE, please, pretty pease point to some evidence of this? i dont get it.”
I don’t think he was trying to incite riot as much as incite other student to somehow stand in the way and prevent the officers from escorting him out. As far as evidence: His yelling “Get off me” before he was tased is one, his “Patriot Act” and continued obscenities is another. Actualy asking aloud “Will no one stop these people?” I think is pretty clear that he at least wanted someone to interfere.
mirror: Your points contradict the use of force policy posted by Blake Ross. If policy itself is illegal, then we can discuss that, but if you could, please reference that.
Sixer70: But does it have a difference in effect? If the only difference is the discharge method and not the effect, couldn’t it have been possible that the student really couldn’t get up?
November 18th, 2006 at 2:43 am
Sixer70:”. . .maybe it is EARLY/LATE in your part of the world”
It’s almost 2:45am here in San Jose, CA and most of the US, so I guess you don’t live around here. I don’t think the name calling it going to help anyone, so despite what others may write, let’s try heed Blake’s words.
Thought we had kinda something starting here, but I’m dead tired, so I’ll check back later.
November 18th, 2006 at 2:52 am
no, in actuallity, the Direct-stun method has proven more inconsistent than the deployed method. i do not have the stats on hand to back this up but they are easily Googled. it has alot to do with actual “contact”.
whereas in “deployed” mode, if the contact do NOT make a suitable connection, they will fall off and NOT render a suitable transfer of power.
in “Direct-Stun” mode, the entire contact is controlled by the angle between the officer’s hand and subject. Even slight variations can make a difference because of connectivity issues. Deployed charges will “adapt” to the contact surface whereas Direct applications are at the mercy of the angel of the “gun” itself.
also, tasers have been proven to be defeated by thick layers of clothing as well as certain types of clothing.
My own PERSONAL OPINION (note the CAPS!!!) is that this student was well aware of his surroundings and the crowd he drew. He was well aware of the chain of events he setting into motion from the very first request of the CSO for an ID at @ 2300hrs W/L, to the actual application of the very first, and subsequent taser applications.
you will notice that in the crude video, the “actor” kicks his legs WAY over his head by at least 18″ or more. for a person that has been “incapacitated”, this is an impossible feat. to lift that amount of weight, (leg muscle alone) for that great of a distance would be almost impossible for a minor charge from an approved taser device.
your own referrence to the “actors” words prove his intention to incite a riot:
“Will no one stop these people?” I think is pretty clear that he at least wanted someone to interfere.” —Charles Kuo
this is a classic case of inciting a riot. if this actor had TRULY felt a need for “civil disobedience”, there are clearly defined ways of going about it. Causing a scene in the middle of the UCLA Library at 2300L IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT!!!!!!!!
Had ANYONE felt the need to raise a complaint, HONESTLY, the time do it was well afforded the next day when supervisors were ON DUTY vice 11PM AT NIGHT when most ppl are in bed!!!!
November 18th, 2006 at 2:55 am
It’s pretty ridiculous that anyone would get tased in a library. I’d think that in a school setting the UCPD’s concern would be with the surrounding student’s safety, which didn’t seem to be much of a concern at all, apart from asking people to move back.
College kids are always going to have problems with authority and are going to want to resist officers requests, and most campus police realize that as well. These officers should have just let him walk away. What is the punishment for forgetting your ID card? Getting kicked out of the library, NOT being arrested. He was leaving - as the cops asked him to - and then they tased him. It just seems like some cops itching to use their tasers to me. Maybe they’re jealous they never made it to college and hold grudges…
November 18th, 2006 at 4:38 am
I just wanted to note that this incident at least partly made it to a German news magazine. It’s only online for now, but it got quite a bunch of readers:
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,449283,00.html “Rodney-King-Ermittler soll Misshandlungsfälle untersuchen”
I’m having a hard time to translate this headline, so I’ll just sum up the article in a few words. It’s about police brutality in LA and they refer some older cases. They report that the student thinks that the incident had an ethical, anti-Muslim background but the police said they did it to break his “passive resistance” by making his arms/legs like flubber (my translation) so that the police would have had a hard time carrying him out. They quote the police saying that he was about 200 pounds and that they tasered him to get him up his feet.
Due to the video anger is growing like in the Rodney King case. Merrick Bobb’s task is to prevent that “it becomes more”. (probably to prevent escalation, but they didn’t write that in the article).
I’m sorry for the poor translation, but it’s not every day vocabulary. Maybe someone else can help out here. I hope I got at least the intention right, so no one is offended. Remember that I just translated the article, it’s not my opinion.
xeen
November 18th, 2006 at 5:18 am
The student might’ve forgot his ID, he might’ve been angered at having to interrupt his work over what seemed like a mere technicality, and he might’ve had his fists up to begin with, so to speak, because of a long-standing fear that his liberties would be taken away at any minute due to his ethnic background, and here it was, sure enough, as expected. The fact that it was nothing of the kind was beside the point. So he exploded, audibly and visibly. The explosion did seem out of proportion to the provocation, which at least in the beginning was about as humdrum and routine as it gets. But if you don’t make an effort to understand why it happened you won’t begin to know know what to do when it happens again. Calling the student an “asshat” or an “actor” isn’t good enough.
November 18th, 2006 at 7:08 am
I have a great respect for law enforcement officers; it is a difficult occupation often with little reward. That being said, these officers are people too, they can make mistakes and can in some instances have a slightly slanted view on what is right or wrong.
Was Mr. Tabatabainejad trying to make a statement by his actions? Definitely
Did Mr. Tabatabainejad handle the situation right? Definitely not
Sixer70 Says:
November 17th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
this asshat then decides to worsen the situation by calling on the mass of 20-30 students to join him in the resistance. he is now trying to incite a riot against 2-3 police officers.
I have yet to see any indication Mr. Tabatabainejad was ‘calling on the masses’, to take any action at all. There are a number of people that keep saying this, however I believe this to be a distortion of the facts.
Sixer70 Says:
November 17th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
of course, i will be flamed by the tree-hugging liberals here. all the Berkley fucktards and such. they will ignore the simple fact that all this actor had to do was COMPLY with either the CSO or the police by showing an ID which, the other 20-30 students had no problem doing or, leaving the building.
Do you believe that anyone who does not agree with you is a ‘tree-hugging liberal’ or a ‘Berkley fucktard’? That in itself shows you have a black and white mentality, ‘you are either with me or against me’. You have your views, and I respect that, but to summarize all who see things different as you have done is quite closed minded.
Sixer70 Says:
November 18th, 2006 at 1:55 am
these officers acted in GOOD FAITH, so ANY Mistakes of LAW SHOULD be excused under that provision if nothing else, unless of course California is so far gone as to condemn it’s protectors………..
What a frightening view. Do you honestly think that because they are officers, they should be exempt from the laws they are put there to enforce. This is a very childish view of ‘Do as I say, not as I do’ mentality. I am very grateful that not all Law enforcement officers think the same way you do.
Sixer70 Says:
November 18th, 2006 at 2:04 am
you DO have rights! But, they end as soon as you endanger someone else.
Again you have shown your tunnel vision of your interpretation of what is just and right. Even a mass murderer has rights. Granted, breaking the law does revoke some of your rights but not all of them.
Can you tell me who Mr. Tabatabainejad was endangering? How does ‘going limp’ indicate endangerment to anyone? Once Mr. Tabatabainejad was in hand cuffs any threat was gone, and the repeated use of the taser was unjustified. Sixer70, you have also yet to answer the question Charles Kuo asked.
Charles Kuo Says:
November 18th, 2006 at 12:35 am
Sixer70: I wasn’t aware you were an officer. If you don’t mind, I have a question…….
Is it possible that even in “drive-stun,” it could have debilitated him?
November 18th, 2006 at 8:07 am
Who was Mostafa endangering? He didn’t have any weapons, all he had was an elevated voice. It was the police that pulled the taser on him. It was also the police who turned to the students at the end and threatened them with the taser. There is a difference with between a warning and a threat.
Assault is and i quote “Any word or action intended to make another person fearful of immediate physical harm; a reasonably believable threat.”
*This was taken from West’s Legal Environment of Business, 6th Ed.
So with the above definition, it is obvious that the police assaulted the students who were asking for their badge numbers. The officer had taser in hand, and ready to be used and threatened the students…simple as that.
November 18th, 2006 at 9:16 am
Okay, why am I withholding judgment when it seems so clear to others? PLEASE keep in mind, this is how I would form judgment, not necessarily how the investigation will or should go.
Important questions with no decisive factual back up that I’m aware of (if you are, please share):
First and most difficult: What was their state of minds? While no one truly knows except those individuals involved, can determine this to a large extent by words and actions.
The CSO - Was he truly doing random checks (when I was there, you actually checked everyone, but maybe there are too many people now)? DID he single the student out? Did the student do anything to cause alarm? Did he think it was a student or possibly someone with something to hide? There have been no witnesses speak as to how the CSO acted, but presumably, if he had said or done anything grossly inappropriate, someone would have come forward. Besides interviews, Radio transmissions by the CSO are on a separate police frequency that is recorded. What the CSO says matters since it will show both his state of mind and color what the officers expectations are as they come in. We don’t know this yet.
The student – Did he truly feel he was being singled out? Did he have reasonable cause to be? Was this his first time in the library? Being carded? If not, why react this way? Are there any extenuating circumstances that caused him to be so emotional? Obviously, he did not react like a normal student would react to being asked for ID. A very valid question is why? And if he did truly feel as if he was singled out, did say indicate that? We don’t know this yet.
The officers – What was their information on the situation as they came in? Was it, “there’s a student being an uncooperative” or “a suspicious person who refuses to show ID or leave?” Were these justifiable thoughts? Many UCPD officers are former students though I am unsure of the initial responding officers. However, all officers are used to dealing with students as well as outsiders who come on to campus and are up to no good. This matters in that the officers did not “just let him leave.” Was he trying to evade them? Would he have walked with him? If he was already up and walking out, what was their thinking in grabbing his arm? Could they have thought he might try to run away? Was this thinking reasonable? We don’t know this yet.
Many have said that regardless of everything else, it is justifiable to draw the conclusion that this was excessive force. That regardless of motivation, the students behavior or the officers intentions, that the actions far exceed any conceivable use of the taser multiple times. I respectfully disagree.
One key is how the taser was used. The LA times story online this morning:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-taser18nov18,0,4080498.story?coll=la-home-headlines
is about the most balance coverage I’ve read so far in the popular media. One point they mention is: “The officers used the device in stun mode — which affects only the part of the body being touched — rather than the dart mode, in which tiny electrodes are fired into a person and pass a current through them, disabling the person entirely.” I think this is key as the taser was used to get him to move as opposed to paralyze him. In this case, it is essentially a different device. I make this point as many many people have confused the two. But even the Times is unclear. They quote other police agencies:
“Several local police agencies — including the LAPD and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department — allow officers to use Tasers only if a suspect poses a physical threat or is acting combatively. The sheriff’s policies expressly say deputies can’t use Tasers simply to move someone. “We look for assaultive conduct,” said Bill McSweeney, chief of the sheriff’s leadership and training division “We generally don’t use the Taser on passive resisters except when an individual indicates explosive action to follow, such as a verbal threat.”
But is the dart mode or the stun mode? If they are referring to the “taser” as in firing the darts, that’s not what happened here and makes the above very misleading. I’ve tried to find, without success, a definitive difference the two modes effects and will leave open that this stun mode can possibly as debilitating pending some real data on this. Without that info, I’m withholding judgment with that.
So let’s assume then the student could have gotten up at any time. Now the question then becomes, even if he could get up but chose not to, was it justified for use in that situation? The first question is did they have to escort him out? The second is couldn’t they have dragged him out if they had too? Would that or could that have caused more harm to him than tasering him? If you objectively look at the situation with the present facts, I’m not sure of dragging someone across the a tile floor and down a flight of steps, or forcibly getting him up to do so, which would be worse. The taser certainly looked and sounded worse, but I can see how pulling someone against his will could cause more physical (albeit not as “bad looking”) harm. Would it be okay if they did try to drag him out he cracked a kneecap down the stairs? Finally could they have waited till several more officers show up and carry, each with one limb, him down the stairs? Or would that have made the situation worse?
I don’t have clear answers for these yet, and I’m willing to bet neither do you.
November 18th, 2006 at 9:18 am
I really don’t understand the idiots in the red states. Morons all of them.
November 18th, 2006 at 10:03 am
All your crybaby parents would be suing the hell out of the officers had there been a problem and nobody did anything. You’re all a bunch of useless sob’s and a main reason this country is going to hell.
November 18th, 2006 at 11:17 am
Sixer 70, although you are being pretty respectful of everyone’s views, it is SO hard for me to be able to do that with you. The things you say are so obviously biased, nothing you say make sense to me. Let me ask you something. Isnt the jobs of cops is to protect the public and maintain the peace???? However, they see that tasering this student is upsetting a crowd of INNOCENT students who are doing their homework. Instead of thinking “Let me calm this situation down by finding another method to fix this”, THIS is what they obviously were thinking “OH, these little fucks think they can smart with me, we’ll fucking show them”. This whole fucking thing was about THEIR ego, the fact that THEY feel that everyone should kiss their ass, because they have a fucking badge. I cant beleive how anyone can watch this tape and not see this. Also, I keep hearing about how there’s not enough evidence yet to draw conclusions, and how eye-witness accounts dont count, etc. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT????? Cameras dont lie! A whole group of students are obviously shown as being upset and scared of the OFFICERS, not the student. You are telling me that ALL those students felt that way because of their PAST or PREJUDICE??
November 18th, 2006 at 11:28 am
Also, let me say one more thing. And I know I wasnt being very civil before, so this tie I will be out of respect for everyone. I think this kid considers racial profile a sensitive issue. Im not sure if maybe he has had it happen to him, or to someone he knows, or for whatever reason, this is something that he feels very strongly about and is very sensitive to. One of the officers or guards or whatever singles him out and asks for his I.D. I think I read somewhere that he DID have his I.D., but he was mad that they singled him out that he refused to show it. I dont know for sure if they were racial profiling when they did this, I havent heard enough to really draw an opinion on that, but whatever the case, the kid thought that they were singleing him out. SO he is already upset, probably embarrassed. Even though he is leaving, the cop decides to make it WORSE and more EMBARRASSING by grabbing his arm. Even though the kid was NOT being arrested. Thats when the kid lost it and started yelling “Get off me!!”. I know that he could have done things differently, and it wouldnt have ended up so bad, but the thing that bothers me, is that I think that could have happened to any of us! If I were him, I could see myself feeling the same anger and loss of control! But Im a good person, I sure as hell dont deserve to be tasered over and over! WTF????I apologize again for sounding like im attacking anyone, but this whole thing has really gotten to me. The problem is that cops arent the most understanding or kind people. A lot of them are jerks. THAT is where it starts. The way they treat you, before they even know whether you are commiting any kind of crime. They start a situation that is most likely going to end up with someone getting in trouble.
November 18th, 2006 at 11:37 am
I found this comment on You Tube, and anyone who cant see the common sense in this, is crazy in my eyes:
“As a former police officer and with a father that was a retired police officer and an uncle that is also a retired chief of police, I can tell you that this was a unnecessary use of force. The tazer is not a cattle prod, it is only used to protect bystanders or the officers themselves. In no way did this student pose a threat to the officers or bystanders. I cannot think of any situation in which you would tazer a hand cuffed person.”
DUDE, this is what makes total sense to me: “THE TAZER IS NOT A CATTLE PROD”
That is exactly what they were using it as.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
MSA: “As a former police officer and with a father that was a retired police officer and an uncle that is also a retired chief of police, I can tell you that this was a unnecessary use of force. The tazer is not a cattle prod, it is only used to protect bystanders or the officers themselves. In no way did this student pose a threat to the officers or bystanders. I cannot think of any situation in which you would tazer a hand cuffed person.”
DUDE, this is what makes total sense to me: “THE TAZER IS NOT A CATTLE PROD”
From my interpretation of the policy that Blake posted, it reads to me that that is essentially what the taser in “Drive Stun” mode is used for. Again, it’s unclear if you only look at the video if he was shot “tasered” in the way that most people think of or as the police maintain, this drive stun mode.
Furthermore, I do not truly know the differences in effect of this mode or whether the former officer quoted in Youtube knew how this was being applied, since it’s not apparent in the video. The quotes from the other LA Police agencies and the UT Austin Police manual don’t mention this drive stun mode, so when they hear someone is tasered, it’s conceivable that they don’t train for it. Whether it’s because they consider it the same as firing or they have a different kind of taser or what, I’m not sure.
Could you address my previous comments?
November 18th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Or I guess to put it another way, if you asked told that former officer on Youtube that they were applying the drive stun mode, would he say:
1. That’s the same thing as taser, it doesn’t matter.
2. I’m not familiar with what that is, I’m not sure of that’s application.
I’m not sure which answer it would be.
November 18th, 2006 at 12:57 pm
Sixer70:
Wow. You are right. I am was completely ignorant of the UCPD’s taser policy of allowing torture against passively resisting persons.
My understanding of legal taser policy was based on my local police policy and those I had heard of in other jurisdictions, such as described in the LA Times:
“Several local police agencies — including the LAPD and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department — allow officers to use Tasers only if a suspect poses a physical threat or is acting combatively. The sheriff’s policies expressly say deputies can’t use Tasers simply to move someone. “We look for assaultive conduct,” said Bill McSweeney, chief of the sheriff’s leadership and training division “We generally don’t use the Taser on passive resisters except when an individual indicates explosive action to follow, such as a verbal threat.”
Furthermore, I now understand that the taser has been used in other jurisdictions against fleeing suspects in non-violent crimes with no finding of illegality against the police. So, wow, I stand corrected.
These UCPD officers took a simple trespassing ejection and turned it into a battle of egos. Once the guy was handcuffed it became simply abuse.
In my jurisdiction, the lawyers for the school and police would already be estimating how much they are going to have to pay in damages. It will be interesting to see if UC can legally defend the UCPD taser policy and the exectuion of it in this instance. I think a small minority of citizens in California could hear the facts, let alone see the video, and not consider this an outrageous abuse.
P.S. I’m afraid your details and style of comment make you sound exactly like a police or industry spokesman
November 18th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
mm.. this is kinda of late response, but yes. I am going into neurology. So I do know about those things.
As to the rest of your comments, Qualia. Just watch the video. Closely. You’ll see that I am right. As to your probable cause comment. Doesn’t apply. Mostafa made himself a suspect. From that point, you MUST assume that he is dangerous. Otherwise you are liabel to get a bullet in the brain.
November 18th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
Honestly, I dont know the answer to that, but whatever “method” they used, I think its pretty obvious that it was inflicting pain on him? I mean, at one point the guy flies 4 feet into the air practically. I really dont see much relevance in what you are asking. It seems like you are missing the big picture? Im sorry, Im not trying to be rude, maybe I’m not understanding what you are getting at
November 18th, 2006 at 1:15 pm
Take a look at this article:
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/taser-incident-at-ucla-under-review/20061117195509990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001
November 18th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Why did the entire conversation get slanted to political views as to who was at fault. What scares me is that the respondants are so amazingly intent on being correct and running the other perspectives into the ground AS FAR AS POSSIBLE. UNITED WE STAND? I only wish.
EVERYONE WAS AT FAULT! First, Mostafa Tabatabainejad was far too defiant to requests for simple removal from the library. He was obviously looking for trouble. Second, the officers turned a placid situation (though verbal, but completely safe for the library patrons) hostile…repeatedly. He was arrested no? Then, I only hope he had his rights read to him…I sure didn’t hear it in the video. Thirdly, the students watching were “encouraging” each side as they saw fit (just like the majority responding here) instead of taking action and helping control the situation.
AND the LAST…the reactants are HUGELY AT FAULT. An overwhelming majority of respondants is drawing conclusions from little evidence and adding to the fraility of the situation.
I fear that this is just another snowflake on the evergrowing snowball of the next “American Revolution.” Our rights are gone (probably in our best interest of safety) and there is no end in sight of how order is going to be restored. What happens if something really drastic happens in this nation…not someone unjustly getting “proded” for non-compliance but a situation where lives are destroyed. Katrina was a natural disaster. An event is going to happen that will cause our government to overract again…it is just when that is the question. I hope you are ready for martial law and an eventual one world government…it isn’t very far away. Can anyone say “Biblical Prophesy Fulfillment?” I can…and just did.
November 18th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
MSA:”I mean, at one point the guy flies 4 feet into the air practically. I really dont see much relevance in what you are asking. It seems like you are missing the big picture? Im sorry, Im not trying to be rude, maybe I’m not understanding what you are getting at”
I’m saying that if you tried to make the case that if the police felt it necessary to get him out as quickly as possible (which can be debated separately), then the method they used in tasering to “prod” him to get up was the “best” way in the officers mind to get him out. That can be debated as well as to whether that was the “best” and “quickest” way, or dragging him down the stairs was preferable. I don’t know if they could have simply “picked him up.” I don’t think it’s clear that they tried.
What is the big picture? I feel people who rushing to judgement are missing the big picture. When someone is so tied to their judges, whatever facts and information that is still missing and will come out will be interpeted to fit that pre-judgement and not an objective one. The emotion on both sides of the issue demonstrate this.
I am well prepared to say the officers were wrong should the UCLA or independent investigator say so with a complete and hopefully, impartial reviews. If there are facts not yet revealed that support the officers, will you look at them objectively or consider anything the can potential explain the officers actions as “apologist spin?” That I would say is the bigger picture here.
November 18th, 2006 at 6:08 pm
I just reviewed the Taser Policies pdf file (found here http://www.ucpd.ucla.edu/ucpd/zippdf/2006/Taser_Policies.pdf and also linked in Blake Ross’s article above . . .way above at this point) and found the following parts relevant to this situation.
(page 1)
301.24 PAIN COMPLIANCE TECHNIQUES
Officers utilizing any pain compliance technique should consider the totality of the circumstances including, but not limited to:
(b) The potential risk of serious injury to the individual being controlled,
(d) The nature of the resistance of the individual(s) involved,
(e) The level of resistance of the individual(s) involved,
(g) If time permits (e.g. passive demonstrators), other reasonabl alternatives
(page 3)
General Order 05-01 (Amended 09-27-05)
4) General
Although not absolutely prohibited, officers should give additional consideration to the unique circumstances involved prior to applying the Taser to any of the following individuals:
C) Individuals who are handcuffed or otherwise restrained;
E) Individuals whos position or activity may result in collateral injury (e.g. falls from significant heights, operating vehicles, etc.)
(page 4)
7) FIELD DEPLOYMENT TACTICS
C) When practical, prior to firing the Taser, the officer discharging the Taser should:
i) Announce that the Taser is being deployed and provide the suspect with a reasonable opportunity to voluntarily comply. This may prevent unintentional shootings and give warning to the suspect.
ii) If, after a verbal warning, an individual continues to express an unwillingness to voluntarily comply with and officer’s lawful orders and it appears both reasonable and practical under the circumstances, an officer may, but is not required to, display the electrical arc (provided there is not a cartridge loaded into the Taser) or laser in a futher attempt to gain compliance prior to the application of the Taser. The laser should not be intentionally directed into the eyes of another as it may permanently impair their vision.
iii) If practical, instruct Communications to broadcast a Taser is going to be deployed.
8) POST DEPLOYMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
A) Any use, or attempted use of a Taswer against a subject shall be immediately reported to the Watch Commander. Officers and/or supervisors who have discharged a Taser on a suspect shall:
iii) Ensure the suspect’s injuries or complaints of injury (if any) are appropriately treated by medical personnel. Monitor the suspect for signs of “excited delirium.”
iv) Medical treatment and clearance to book shall be sought for any suspect that has received a Taser cartridge discharge and:
(1) The suspect exhibits signs of excited delirium.
(2) The suspect has a pre-existing heart condition or pre-existing respiratory condition.
(4) The suspect has recieved a total of two or more effective and complete Taser cycles.
November 18th, 2006 at 6:28 pm
Hey:
Can you post a link on your blog to this online petition to ban the use of taser guns by UCPD + have a transparent and independent investigation of the UCLA tasering?
Here’s the link:
To read and sign petition, go to: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stoptasersUCPD/
On Tuesday, Nov. 11, several UCPD officers arrested, handcuffed, and repeatedly electrocuted a UCLA student with a taser gun in a UCLA library because he did not show police officers his UCLA ID card and refused to leave the library.
For a video of the incident, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3CdNgoC0cE
The incident shocked those who witnessed the abuse (as can be clearly seen in the video) and those who have seen the video. What happened to this student clearl