I was pepper spayed on MLK day for no reason. I wish we had a better world. https://t.co/KhmJbJFkFG pic.twitter.com/MeE50F4g6K
— Jesse Hagopian (@JessedHagopian) January 20, 2015
Looks like SPD pepper sprayed the wrong skell. From his lawyer’s press release:
The James Bible Law Group will be filing a tort claim against the City of Seattle and the Seattle Police Department in relation to the senseless pepper spraying of a prominent Seattle School Teacher and activist shortly after his MLK day speech. Jesse Hagopian had finished giving a powerful speech about how black lives matter when he was sprayed with pepper spray by a Seattle Police Officer. He was on the phone with his mother and making plans to be at his two year old child’s birthday party when he was sprayed. It is notable that this irrational police action occurred while he was several feet onto a Seattle Sidewalk.
This incident was captured on video and we will be allowing the media to view it during tomorrow’s press statement.
Can’t wait to see the video. And I hope Hagopian and his lawyers take this case as far as they can possibly go.
UPDATE: Here is the video clip of an SPD officer assaulting Hagopian and other peaceful passersby:
Hard to see how anybody can defend this as responsible policing.
Here’s some video:
http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....protesters
But this can’t be it if Mr. Hagopian was several feet onto the street and an officer ran up in his face and sprayed him right in his face, as he reported on FB.
Several people in this video recording with their own cell-phone cameras.
@1 I don’t see anything in that video that justifies the indiscriminate pepper spraying seen in the video. All the pushing and shoving was done by cops. People are in the street, big deal, so what? Blocking traffic doesn’t justify police violence. The street was blocked off by police anyway. So what’s your point?
@ 2
You were the guy saying ‘fleeing felon’ doctrine was going to be used to exonerate Officer Wilson when he shot Mike Brown, so I really don’t care what you think. All I wrote was that the video in my @1 link does not seem to be the one that shows the alleged assault against Mr. Hagopian.
Police are already retaliating against a New Mexico prosecutor for filing charges against killer cops.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....tail=email
Police are out of control in this country. There should be sweeping changes in police departments, stronger civilian oversight, more prosecutions of cops who cross lines, firings of violent cops, defanging the police unions, major changes to hiring and training practices, demilitarization of civilian police, and much more.
In the meantime, bringing tort suits against municipalities is a way to force changes in the behavior of police who abuse citizens they’re supposed to serve and protect.
And no one should ever forget that Republicans want to take away your right to sue.
@3 I commented @2 on what I saw in the video, not about your comment @1. I said nothing about your comment @1. Are you disputing what I said the video shows? Your comment @3 goes off on a tangent about Michael Brown that is totally irrelevant to anything I said @2.
Yesterday brought news reports that two teenaged girls, ages 16 and 17, in two different incidents, were shot to death by police. Neither had a gun. One allegedly clipped a cop’s knee while driving a stolen car, the other brandished a knife at officers.
I find it ironic that police are demanding a crowd sourcing app that allows users to tell of traffic jams and police speed traps, to remove the cop tracking function because people are “assassinating” police.
Link
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetw.....e-tracking
@ 7,8
Off-topic.
Slog now has video up. What you see is an officer, standing on a corner and pepper spraying a guy walking down the street who’s talking in the phone.
Totally self defense. These civililians have no right to the sidewalk. Walk too near me, get maced.
http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....on-mlk-day
@1 I’ve updated the post, embedding the video of Hagopian being pepper sprayed.
Slow it down just in case you weren’t sure if it was the officer or a bystander yelling. “Get Back! Get Back! Get out of MY department!”
The threatening protester appears to be a guy with a video camera. So, despite being told over, and over, and over that citizens have a protected right to film police, she is still unclear on that concept. You know, after prolonged training and specific (well SPD says they have made specific) policy directives this officer still doesn’t know how to do her job.
So this particular office is under the impression that the sidewalk belongs to her and her alone. It’s HER department. “They shouldn’t have been near me! They should walk elsewhere! They shouldn’t have cameras.”
Still employed by SPD?
“the video in my @1 link does not seem to be the one that shows the alleged assault against Mr. Hagopian”
You got that much right.
I guess others are hearing her scream Seattle Police Department. I kind of think that’s even more of an ‘us again them’ mentality. Like a rallying cry. Like “Wolverines!” Or ‘Sea-Hawks’ or ‘Freeeeeedom!”
“I’m with the SEATLLE POLICE DEPARTMENT and I am good and God damn going to assault you if you don’t put down that camera phone and get the fuck off the sidewalk and back into the street.”
Generally speaking, the police have forgotten what their job is and whom they work for. The post 9/11 militarization, and default stance that everyone, non cop, is a threat drives the problem.
Why does every little suburb or town have a swat team, anti terror teams, and military hardware?
What’s the fix?
1. Pull funding so that there is only regional swat teams.
2. Eliminate military tactics. (This isn’t a f’ing battlefield)
3. Lose the military hardware
4. Get back to “protect and serve”, instead of “just get home alive”
5. Hold police criminally accountable for their actions.
@9 Write your complaint here [ ] and send it here _.
@12 I wonder if she’s this cop?
http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....hile-black
A town meeting in Ferguson held tonight to discuss establishing a civilian oversight board over the police erupted into a brawl between citizens and cops when a police union official shoved a woman who confronted him for wearing an “I am Darren Wilson” wristband to the meeting.
Sure is amazing what a DUMMOCRETIN led city police think they can get away with. Saw the video last night on the news. Puddy doesn’t think the policewoman knew who he was. She was indiscriminately spraying the crowd. Must have felt threatened.
It’s like the video Q13 Fox news played with the older black man using his golf club handle as his cane and the Seattle policewoman accused him of swinging the club at her. The video demonstrated otherwise. He basically hadn’t moved. He was arrested. If the video wasn’t there the police would not have mea culpa’d the way they did. Seems the progressive agenda has filtered down to the police where they think they are above the law and don’t need to apologize for their actions.
Has anyone documented a politician or police DUMMOCRETIN apologizing for their actions?
@ 13
Actually, in the video @1, you can see Mr. Hagopian get sprayed at about 0:36, top left corner, near the light post.
Looks like he either is making or taking a phone call, gently touches another pedestrian to make way for himself, and gets sprayed.
“Why does every little suburb or town have a swat team, anti terror teams, and military hardware?”
They don’t. The police are part of the Deep State, a part of the government sructure that never changes as far as elections go. Politicians change as elections are won and lost, but the Deep State represents that permanent part of government that barely changes at all over time. Other examples include the Military-Industrial Complex, the CIA and the FBI.
They’re all a threat to individual liberty.
SPD Policy on use of pepper spray
Hard to imagine how swinging your arm back and forth while spraying is O.K. under these regulations.
@ 22
Didn’t look right to me, either. Beginning with that woman seemed awfully small to be out doing crowd control. Agreed that the arm swing seemed excessive.
What I would add is that there was an officer down behind her, a guy in the street holding a sign was being pushed to the curb just behind her, and she probably was in defensive mode, perhaps under orders from a supervisor.
From your link, 8.1:
Reasonable: The reasonableness of a particular use-of-force is based on the totality of circumstances known by the officer at the time of the use-of-force and weighs the actions of the officer against the rights of the subject, in light of the circumstances surrounding the event. It must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.
Contrary to what Mr. Hagopian wrote on FB, she didn’t run up into his face and spray into his face. Mr. Hagopian was several feet away, she wasn’t running anywhere and was behind him, standing behind her bike. He wasn’t looking at her and had no idea what she was doing, and he was collateral injury, not a target of direct assault. I’m not sure where I read an insinuation that he might have a specific target by SPD, but that doesn’t seem to be borne out by the video.
It didn’t look reasonable on the video. However, it also didn’t look particularly smart for a guy to take a phone call and turn his attention elsewhere, while only steps from ongoing police action.
There’s probably a lot more video out there. We might even get to see why pepper spray was used in the first place. How that officer was injured. You know, stuff that adds to totality of circumstances. Why all those people pulled out their video cameras in the first place.
@ 23
Ah. I found the source of the insinuation I referred to above. I stand corrected. It was not insinuation. It was informed conjecture:
So not having seen the incident, here’s my bit of informed conjecture as to what might have happened: The police recognized him, saw him reach for his phone, and suspected he might be organizing activities on the ground. So they disabled him.
That’s right. My guess is that the police pepper sprayed Hagopian in order to prevent him from using his phone.
http://horsesass.org/seattle-p.....-as-usual/
I believe if I was told a cop ran up into my activist friend’s face and sprayed pepper spray right into his face for no apparent reason, that’s what I’d guess, too.
“My guess is that the police pepper sprayed Hagopian in order to prevent him from using his phone.”
My guess is that Sloppy is OK with the police pepper-spraying people he doesn’t like and against police pepper-spraying people he does like.
“…it also didn’t look particularly smart for a guy to take a phone call and turn his attention elsewhere, while only steps from ongoing police action…”
What you are referring to unfolded in just a few seconds.
Presumably called to provide specific crowd control assistance surrounding the police officer lying on the pavement (for what reason we do not yet know), the bicycle mounted team immediately formed a line and began to advance toward peaceful citizens passing in the street adjacent to the officer lying down. The officer deploying CS began to do so within seconds of arriving. The deployment was indiscriminate and appears clearly to have been itself employed as a means of directing passersby away from the fallen officer. Quite a number of citizens were hit with the chemical agent. Most will sue. Most will get paid. Including Bailey Onsager (Stafford Frey, whatever, #whenwillSeattlelearn).
I’m sure it’s unintended on your part, but I don’t think even the inadvertent suggestion that citizens are themselves to blame when cops screw up this badly should go unremarked upon. If that use of chemical agents isn’t outside of SPD policy, it most certainly should be. Deploying chemical agents as a way of relocating peaceful citizens away from an area is extremely unwise. I can’t find any nice way to put it: this officer demonstrates that her poor judgment is an unacceptable liability to the city. If that can be fixed with training, all the better. If not…
“Hard to see how anybody can defend this as responsible policing.”
It’s not. Her fellow officers aren’t reacting this way. She’s an out-of-control rogue cop, and should be removed from the force.
http://handbill.us/?p=42598
@19 “She was indiscriminately spraying the crowd. Must have felt threatened.”
None of the other cops near her look like they feel threatened. I think a better explanation is she’s just plain nuts.
@19 “Seems the progressive agenda has filtered down to the police where they think they are above the law and don’t need to apologize for their actions.”
Stinky false equivalency, but nice try. At least you finally realize that police have morphed from protectors to out-of-control bullies.
@21 Government is always and everywhere a threat — or at least a potential threat — to liberty. But so are individuals, especially in the absence of government. We need government to protect ourselves from each other.
@23 “he was collateral injury”
Which doesn’t mean he isn’t owed compensation by the city.
@25 I think you can take that one to the bank.
@26 “Deploying chemical agents as a way of relocating peaceful citizens away from an area is extremely unwise.”
It’s also tortious, or if it isn’t, it should be. I guess we’ll find out when Mr. Hagopian sues SPD and this cop. That elderly woman next to him should sue their asses, too.
@ 26
Actually, it was intended on my part. A citizen walking in a crosswalk, with the green, who happens to be on the phone and due to inattention doesn’t see/hear an announced emergency vehicle bearing down on the intersection, is at some fault if a collision occurs and he/she is injured.
I’d call it (minor) contributory negligence. Mr. Hagopian had every right to be there and to cross the street. However, he knew that there was a police (bicycle) barricade action going on, he knew some of the other people around him were not respecting it, and he was only feet from that barricade. He could have at least been watching what was happening as a means of awareness and self-protection. Instead he was talking to mom. Not the wisest decision he could have made. Look at the 15 second tape again. The woman with the wool cap right next to Mr. Hagopian? She was walking in the same direction but looked back at the officer while she was walking. Why did she do that? Because she was paying attention to what was happening around her, and she heard something to make her look.
I don’t know how quickly things unfolded but it was significantly more than the few seconds you allege. The barricade was there at least 36 seconds before the spraying occurred, and the bicycle barricade was there for a reason, probably indicating that there was unrest that made the SPD see fit to establish it. People running around, a police officer injured and on the ground, all caught in the video @1. All those people with cell phone cameras rolling had them rolling because something had happened and they wanted to capture it.
So it’s not like it was all rainbows and sunshine until we saw the pepper spray come out.
@23
The problem with that analysis of the video is where she is standing. You can see her start spraying near the top of the frame about 39 seconds into your video @1. No one in that crowd moves to break the line of officers. One of the officers in the ground level video seems to have a polite interaction with a sign holder who then moves away just before she takes action.
So, if a guy walking with a phone and not making a move toward her or even making eye contact and a fairly small middle to older aged woman standing calmly nearby are enough to make her feel threatened to the point of escalating to OC crowd dispersal while a phalanx of seemingly calm fellow officers are poised to assist she’s in the wrong line of work because she lacks the basic stress coping skills.
This being Seattle, hard to imagine this was her first time responding to a protest and she quite frankly sucks at it. In the birds eye video I count nine officers blocking the crowd she sprays from getting any closer to the “action” on the other side of the street where the fallen officer is. Eight of them not only aren’t using their pepper spray they don’t even have it at the ready. Only one decides to disperse the crowd through violence.
So is it safe to assume that the eight officers were letting themselves be in further danger and that she is the only reasonable officer at the scene?
@ 35
I’d have that chick busted down to a permanent desk job faster than you can say ‘union steward’ if it were up to me.
But I’m just an anti-union shill, so…
Seriously, some people end up in the wrong job, despite all efforts to select the right people. If she’s re-trained and put out there again, and something else happens, the City’s liability would be unlimited. Think Cleveland cop killing 12 year-old.
No one got hurt – seriously – this time. We were lucky.
IDIOT Wabbit,
The threatened sentence was checkmate absurdity. Since checkmate screams absurd, absurd Puddy is using it too.
Butt, the comment of the progressive agenda percolating down stands. She would not be spraying into the crowd if she didn’t think she would be reprimanded for it! People know the limits of their authority and also know how far they can bend the rules and still get away with it. Somehow her defense will be she felt afraid! Watch!
@34
“…he knew that there was a police (bicycle) barricade action going on, he knew some of the other people around him were not respecting it, and he was only feet from that barricade…”
You seem to know an awful lot about what Mr. Hagopian knew at the time. Looks to me like he was on the phone and simply trying to get out of there. And I have no idea what he “knew” at the time. Only he gets to say. And the court will have to believe him.
Here’s a link to the action from another perspective.
http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....protesters
The deployment involving Mr. Hagopian is in the top center of the frame and begins at about the 33 sec. mark. You can easily pick out the lady you mention with the white hair and blue scarf and light coat who was also sprayed as she and Mr. Hagopian pass behind the utility pole located in the foreground. Maybe the officer was “inspired” by the use of the chemical agents by the officers behind her. Meh.
Whatever her reasons, nothing present in any of the videos or eyewitness accounts would tend to validate this officers decision to deploy chemical agents against peaceful citizens simply trying to walk around an incident. It’s a tiny bit obscene to suggest that Mr. Hagopian would bear some responsibility. I’m not even sure you’d be allowed to argue it in court. The common reasonable interpretation of a police barricade is “this is a line, do not cross”. None of these citizens appear to disobey police orders or attempt to cross any line or enter the restricted area. They simply are passing by. Passing by within range. A new standard. Nice. I’d be willing to bet a fairly large sum of money that most Superior Court judges and jurors would not be enthusiastic about your new, novel interpretation of citizen responsibilities when encountering a police line. We must now stay out of range of their weapons? Not so much. But these claims wont see the inside of any courtroom. Seattle’s taxpayers will just pay. Like they always do.
@ 38
You seem to know an awful lot about what Mr. Hagopian knew at the time.
It’s what he wrote on his FB page.
It’s a tiny bit obscene to suggest that Mr. Hagopian would bear some responsibility.
Well, it’s a price worth paying, and it’s one of the nicer things said about me on this blog, so I thank you for noticing.
I do believe that no one seems to be talking about an intentional pepper spray hit on Mr. Hagopian anymore.
@40
So you’re only troubled by your police department spraying citizens bystanders with chemical agents when it is intentional?
I’ll grant you that removes the criminal element from the situation. And it lessens (slightly) the liability for Seattle taxpayers. But Mr. Hagopian is still entitled to damages, a fact certainly not lost on James Bible.
Even for those of you who seem to delight in the physical injury of people whose politics you oppose, aren’t you getting tired of paying them, and their lawyers, and the SPD lawyers?
@34 “The woman with the wool cap right next to Mr. Hagopian? She was walking in the same direction but looked back at the officer while she was walking. Why did she do that? Because she was paying attention to what was happening around her, and she heard something to make her look.”
Which didn’t save her from catching a face full of pepper spray, so what’s your point?
@34 This is standard rightwing blame-the-victim-of-police-brutality fare. You should be focusing on the cop’s behavior, not that of innocent bystanders hit by the cop’s random spraying.
@35 We’ve seen a number of examples around the country of police gratuitously spraying demonstrators under the guise of crowd control. In 2011, New York City police used netting to pen a group of female demonstrators, then pepper sprayed them. Also in 2011, University of California-Davis campus cops sprayed peaceful demonstrators at point-blank range, causing several injuries; the university paid $1 million to settle legal claims. All over the country, we’re seeing abusive behavior by cops against lawful protesters. And how do rightwingers react to this incidents? They stand up and cheer these violent police violations of citizens’ constitutional rights.
@36 “I’d have that chick busted down to a permanent desk job faster than you can say ‘union steward’ if it were up to me.”
Any reason why you wouldn’t fire her? See your next paragraph. That’s what I’d do.
“Seriously, some people end up in the wrong job, despite all efforts to select the right people.”
I think there’s a very, very major issue in terms of what kind of people are being hired to be cops. It’s absolutely clear that law enforcement is attracting, and hiring, the wrong people in many cases.
“If she’s re-trained and put out there again, and something else happens, the City’s liability would be unlimited.”
Unfortunately, probably not. America has a big cop problem. Its cops are out of control. The reason they are is lack of accountability; they don’t get prosecuted, they don’t get fired, they don’t lose pay, taxpayers get stuck with the legal settlements. If she’s retrained and put out there and something else happens, the city will pay another settlement, the union will protect her job, and the citizenry won’t be safe from her until she retires on a fat police pension.
“Think Cleveland cop killing 12 year-old.”
Think a cop who was fired for psychological unsuitability and poor performance, and quickly hired by another police department a few miles away. The legal liability of the second department should be huge.
@37 “Somehow her defense will be she felt afraid!”
You mean like the cop who arrested the old guy using a golf club as a cane who falsely alleged he swung it at her? She even shouted, “this is being recorded, it’s on tape!” It damn sure WAS being recorded, and her own damn video camera proved she was lying.
This is ALWAYS the excuse police use for brutality. Duh! Saying so doesn’t make you a fucking genius.
@40 “I do believe that no one seems to be talking about an intentional pepper spray hit on Mr. Hagopian anymore.”
As you’re a doctor, and many doctors can’t comprehend even elementary legal concepts, let me explain how this works. This was an intentional pepper spray hit on Mr. Hagopian because she sprayed the crowd intentionally, not accidentally, and that being the case, it doesn’t become intentional simply because she didn’t target him specifically. Comprende? Of course not, you don’t understand a damn thing about law. Nor are you expected to; you’re a doctor.
@41 “I’ll grant you that removes the criminal element from the situation. And it lessens (slightly) the liability for Seattle taxpayers.”
As I tried to explain to Doctor Bob above, it does neither. By randomly spraying into the crowd, she committed both an assault (criminal) and a tort (civil liability). Who got hit by the spray only goes to the identity of the victim(s), which is immaterial for criminal law purposes, and in terms of civil liability only determines who is entitled to the damages. But it does not affect either liability or measure of damages. The latter is a function of loss or injury, which is specific to the injured person, but who that person is doesn’t matter in the sense that for a given harm or injury the recovery will be the same regardless of whether the victim is John Doe or Jane Doe.
@48,
So what’s your Rabbit legal opinion on the novel defense offered up by the doc? Would a King County Superior Court be willing to hear arguments about Mr. Hagopian’s share of liability for the tort, having failed to adequately attend to the potential for irrational violent behavior by nearby police?
What’s all this talk about pastry when a man has clearly been unfairly attacked by the Seattle police. It just makes my blood boil!
some reporter should cover this case including pleadings discovery and motions. until the media starts covering these “obvious excessive force” cases the citizens will have no idea how cops get off in these cases. how they avoid liability. here’s a few ways:
-individual cop gets to assert immunity. we the taxpayers pay for her lawyer to assert it.
-city; to make the city liable you have to show custom of excessive force. a near impossible task. it’s like you have to litigate every excess force incident in one trial can’t admit the doj report into evidence. statements by murray and mcginn there is a problem with systemic excessive force — one case held those are not even admissible! amazing!
-city never, ever breaks ranks with the cop that is sued and never says “okay, this cop is a rogue cop, go get him, but we’re not liable he’s a rogue cop.” to always unite is odd; to the city attorney there is NEVER a rogue cop.
-in a settlement offer is made, ie if the above does not work, the ocp will never pay it, you the taxpayer will pay for it! it won’t even appear on the spd budget and the cop who caused a settlement for $50K or $200K to be paid won’t even be dinged in his or her personnel file, nor disciplined. not even if the civil case shows the cop lied.
it’s a pretty good system for protecting cops, all paid for by us, the taxpayers. we pay the settlements. we pay the city attorney lawyers or sometimes outside counsel. the cop never, ever pays, not in a judgment, not in paying a judgment, not in paying a settlement not in being disciplined or fired; never ever. well, unless you shoot a native american in cold blood; then you have to resign, that’s it. you don’t even pay then.
since there are no consequences, the bad conduct continues. this is one of the overarching principles of civil justice; we make defendants pay so they won’t do the wrongful acts again. but in this system, the cop never pays. WE have created this system including thru judges and contracts and what not, we have to change this system of protection of cops in order to bring about a change in their conduct. they have walls behind walls behind walls of protection. of course they will not change their conduct.
@49 No, because only negligent behavior reduces a plaintiff’s damage award under Washington’s comparative negligence rule, and that behavior isn’t negligent. Unwise, maybe, but not legal negligence.
@50 If Hagopian’s case makes your blood boil, wait until you read about this one: http://handbill.us/?p=42712
Florida cops, after killing an elderly man, tried to cover up what they did by shipping his body to a funeral home and ordering it cremated without the knowledge or permission of his family, so that no autopsy could be performed.
we can be mad all we want, protest all we want, sue all we want, nothing will change until we make our city council and mayor and city attorney change their practices that systemically protect, distance, immunize and enable cops who do bad stuff.
what bothers me a lot is there are two systems of accountability that are failing, and nobody changes them.
one is the cops: they’re supposed to be the system of accountability. like when your company fires someone not doing his job, or hitting customers? every time we add another layer we’re enabling the first layer, the cops themselves, to fucking get away with NOT running themselves lawfully and accountably. they’re supposed to. we should not have to even have other systems on top of the cops.
the second system is the courts. we have laws that make this stuff supposedly illegal but a host of contract clauses, policies, attitudes, and judge made laws in effect make the lawsuit system …..kind of ineffective. certainly that every cop who settles doesn’t pay a dime means in the end, the courts do not provide accountability the way that say general negligence laws impose consequences on you as a driver if you operate the vehicle in a way that causes damage and is negligent. get a few judgments against you and your insurance rates spike up and you sometimes have to pay the victim.
cops never, ever, ever pay a dime to anyone when they hit them beat them spray them. WE the taxpayers pay. so of course, all psychology market theory incentive theory game theory and about 40,000 years of history tells us — someone won’t change without consequences. in short we have made them kings, or say, like the nobles of old that no peasant could ever sue, and until we unmake them unaccountable lords this shit will continue.