When does Police Defense become Police Brutality?

Taking it Too Far...

Often times we hear of brutal acts committed by the police towards civilians. We tend to gaze in shock and sometimes even offer our own personal opinions amongst ourselves, but how many times do we truly assess what’s going on and how often it is occurring. Do we ever further our research on the many countless attacks that have taken place thus far? In fact, if you simply Google the phrase “police brutality’ you would be surprised how many hits you get and the grotesque images. For instance there is a website that is dedicated to the “Top Thirty Cases of Extreme Brutality,” (http://brainz.org/30-cases-extreme-police-brutality-and-blatant-misconduct/). Now to some, that may not appear as a large number but when you read these horrific stories you receive somewhat of a “wake up call.” Now within all these cases the police have argued that they: feared for their lives, have reasonable evidence to believe the suspect was armed, or have created some lousy excuse to justify their actions. Knowing this the question remains: When does police defense become police brutality, what is justified as going too far?

In Galveston, Texas a twelve year old girl was mistaken as a prostitute, based mainly on the tightness of the shorts she was wearing, and taken into custody by police. The little girl, Dymond Milburn, went outside her mother’s house one evening to switch the circuit breaker. While she was outside a blue van pulled up in front of her house and three men grabbed her and tried to place her in it. At the time the young girl was unaware that these men were undercover police officers, who had mistaken her for a prostitute. Dymond immediately began to panic and grabbed the nearest tree as she screamed for her father. The officers decided that she was resisting arrest and began to brutally attack her with both their flashlights and fists. Her parents eventually heard her yelling and rushed outside to find them attacking their daughter. She was transported to the hospital following the beating where she had bruises, cuts, double vision, a bloody ear, and both eyes were blackened. Three weeks following this incident both Dymond and her father were arrested for allegedly assaulting a public servant.

By this brief description one may not be convinced that the police did anything wrong. However, with further investigation it is clear that this was another brutal attack by law enforcement. The police did not have the correct address that was given to them in the call. There was also a description of the alleged prostitutes that they were supposed to be looking for: “three white females,” this young lady was African American. The three police officers’ main defense is that Dymond and her parents were well aware of the fact that they were police because they had on shirts and badges that identified them as such, and stated it verbally. They also stated that when Dymond began to try and run away from them she yelled “F**k you, I hate the police.” The officers also said that Milburn struck one of them in the face however, this contradicted with their original story in which they stated she ran to hide behind a bush and when they try to obtain her she began to cling on to it. So the question remains was this act legitimate?

The answer is not at all. Too many times the police get away with doing whatever they want and however they wish to. They excuse their actions by saying “I felt threatened” or “the individual wouldn’t cooperate, my safety was at risk”. But who’s to determine what’s threatening or not? How do you know when the officers were only protecting themselves and when they were using their authority to their advantage? Is there anything one can implement to even stop this from reoccurring so many times? At this time, no, because it is solely based on the character of the officer and/or his judgment. So at the end of the day individuals will just have to face the fact that if you’re at the wrong place or even in the same vicinity, at the wrong time you may just find yourself to be a victim of so called “police defense!”

Sources:
http://cfcamerica.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=458:pre-teen-12-years-old-sues-officers-for-assault-arrest&catid=3:news&Itemid=1
 
http://www.galvnews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=85aa1df1635a3bbb
 
 
By: Jazmon Kearse

Justice For the Mentally Retarded by Chelsea Johnson

When reading the anecdote at the beginning of Raven's post I was horrified. I was appalled by the way the man's family had treated him all of his life. It is no wonder that he would go to commit such a heinous crime. But it then made me ask: Why should he not be removed from society? I am not surprised that he is dangerous after the way he was abused his entire life. However, if a mentally handicapped person is a danger to society, I believe he too should face consequences so that he is unable to kill again. Raven gave many reasons why its easy for mentally ill to be wrongly accused, but her anecdote concerned a guilty person so the scenario and justification for not using the death penalty does not work. Yet, I agree with Raven that the death penalty is not the answer, but possibly a prison for the mentally ill or a mental institution is appropriate. The death penalty is never the best choice, because so often people are wrongly accused. We can never take back a life. I feel that by locking a perpetrator up in a prison for the rest of his life we are still making him face grave consequences where his life will never be the same. However, in that case, we still have the opportunity to set him free if he is proven innocent. Beyond reasonable doubt is not enough when concerning a human being's life.