Were the UC Davis Police Justified in Pepper Spraying Students?

Keeping in mind that none of us are privy to what the Chancellor conveyed to the UC Davis police chief as action (she changes her story daily…), the UC Davis BMCDB (Biochemistry, Molecular, and Development Biology) has a blog with a more in depth account of the events. And this is from some who, of course, criticize the pepper spray incident. They, however, tend to hold the chancellor’s feet to the fire on this.

But the events, as constructed from several eyewitnesses paint a completely different story than what you see via edited video from one of the two circles of protesters, amateur vid types and observers. Emphasis is added by me.

What really happened last Friday?

On Wednesday night a rally on the Quad turned into an encampment. Several students set up tents in the center of the Memorial Union Quad with the intent of starting a Occupy UC Davis movement. The tents were clearly visible, but not really in anyone’s way. The reason was to support the students and faculty at UC Berkeley who were beaten with batons a week earlier, as well as the hefty (81%) tuition hike that UC plans to burden the students with.

[Mata Musing: the story about this so-called “tuition hike” is apparently a media fueled red herring, as the UC Davis News & Info says there was never a tuition hike considered for the remaining of the academic year. My my… I wonder who started the social media rumor… /sarc]

In the UC system it is illegal to set up tents on UC property and thereby these students broke UC rules. Just as in UC Berkeley a week earlier, the Chancellor ordered the police to remove the tents and just a week earlier this led to a confrontation between students and police in riot gear (this kind of thing is very par the course for UC campuses, check out what happened at Tent University in 2005 at UC Santa Cruz).

As a side note: Chancellor Katehi had a reason to want the Quad clear of tents, earlier this year a sexual assault occurred at the Whole Earth Festival which takes place in the Quad.

According to eye witnesses the police arrived on the scene and were gentle and kind escorting protesters away while focusing calmly on their assignment: removing the tents. This went without incident, until a protester resisted the removal of a tent and put under arrest.

As this was unfolding more and more bystanders gathered around the scene. With a few tents left standing a large circle had formed around the police and the protesters. In fact, two rings had formed with the inner ring largely recording the event up close and the outer ring just observing.

The other protesters did not agree with the person being arrested and decided to sit on the floor with their arms interlocked (according to UC Berkeley Chancellor Birgeneau this is not an act of non-violent civil disobedience). It appeared that the police felt threatened by the crowd that had formed around them. They had to make a decision whether to leave the scene or continue the arrest of the individual.

The police at the scene decided to continue the arrest and in doing so, they focused their attention on the small group sitting on the floor. They gently drove a police car closer to themselves and ordered those sitting on the floor to move. The protesters refused and the police repeated the order but this time with the threat of using pepper spray. The circle of sitting protesters did not prove to be a major barrier to the police, an officer stepped in and out of the circle several times without incidence. The presence of the two circles of protesters and observers caused the police to feel threatened, what happened next is the source of all the shocking images and video that have spread around the world.

Was all of this necessary? In retrospect, the answer is of course no. But at the time the police had to make a decision about continuing the arrest and how to deal with the perceived threat. Keep in mind that the police force in the US had been militarized over the years due to a high budget and small force. Most interacts of students and UCDPD had been civil and they still seemed open dialogue. Most student interactions with UCDPD is being stopped for ignoring a stop-sign on campus while on a bike or not having functioning lights on their bikes. Mostly innocent infractions.

But in this case, UCDPD had a helicopter flying over the scene. At the moment it is unclear what communication existed between the police force on the ground and those up in the helicopter. If people in the helicopter see a large body of student create a circle around their colleagues, it would not be a far stretch to think that they saw this as a potential threat. That the circle consisted of bystanders would not be known to the those in the helicopter.

A more logical scenario would that the police officers on the ground heard the call from the helicopter that they were encircled and they felt threatened and did not engage in a dialogue with those standing around them. Better known as miscommunication or lack of communication. But these are just speculations. For a better picture we have to wait for the outside agency to review the actions of the UCDPD.

All is never as simple as blind supporters of anarchy like to make it. Since these infestants cannot control their own radical and violent elements, there was no way for police to identify who is and is not about to become violent in either of the circles. Remember the “direct, indirect, veiled or conditional” description from the US Davis procedures and manuals above?

Then you can add the Chancellor’s own admission – verbatim – that ““Technically speaking, the police followed protocol…” Considering she knows what her request was, and the events as outlined above, I can’t see where anyone can say, with certainty, that no threat existed from all of those present, or their strategic position entrapping the police.

The campus police should not be taking the heat for this. Nor should the uncooperative protesters be given a free pass.