07-24-2020, 12:17 PM
(07-24-2020, 07:39 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think this is where there needs to be some adjustment. The Navy vet, in particular, was standing in place and speaking to the officers. If there was violence in the crowd behind him and they had been asked to disperse, okay, understandable order. However, we don't see him being violent in any way. Why would the officer with the baton decide to strike him that many times and another officer unload a chemical irritant in his face when there was no sign of violence? If he was disobeying an order, why not try to cuff him and move him out of the way? There was nothing in his mannerisms (based on our limited view of the incident, admittedly) that indicates he would have become violent or even resisted.
The way those LEOs went to that level of force really just emboldens the claims of police brutality. He wasn't behaving in a way that warranted arrest, but somehow warranted breaking bones and OC spray? That just comes across as abusing authority.
As I said in the post you quoted, the baton strikes were unnecessary. I have zero issue with the pepper spray being used if he was already instructed to leave the area. You know better, Bel, if he was ordered to leave and he did not then that, by definition, is resisting. You also can't say he wasn't behaving in a way that warranted arrest a few sentences after saying they should have just arrested him if he had refused to leave the area. Well, you can, it's just contradictory.
