California Police Brutality Lawyer Blog

University of California, Davis police used pepper spray on students who refused to move during a peaceful protest on campus last Friday. The students were seated on the U.C. Davis quad as part of the Occupy Wall Street movement which has swept across the nation in recent months. University police were on the quad after Chancellor Linda Katehi ordered the removal of tents erected by protesters in violation of university policy. After students refused to move, Officer John Pike began spraying them with pepper spray. Video footage of the incident quickly hit the internet.

According to Chancellor Katehi, police were instructed to remove the tents but not to forcibly remove protesters. She also stated university police were asked not to use force or make arrests. Instead, ten people were arrested and nine students hit with pepper spray were treated by medical staff on the scene. Two others were taken to a local hospital before being released.

Officer Pike allegedly claimed he sprayed students in an effort to make their protest disperse. Tear gas, however, is the generally recognized method for dispersing crowds because it is considered to be a non-debilitating irritant. Unlike tear gas, pepper spray includes a resin which will stick to eyes and other membranes. In fact, it is one of the most painful chemicals a person can come into contact with. Pepper spray causes difficulty breathing and makes it almost impossible to open your eyes. It can also cause permanent damage and even death.

Because pepper spray disorients and debilitates by making it impossible to see or move, it should not be used on peaceful protesters and should only be used to stop an attack. In 2006, Officer Pike was honored for tackling a hospital patient who threatened other officers with a pair of scissors. Ironically, he later stated he chose not to use pepper spray on the patient out of concern it might harm other patients or his fellow officers.

Why would a trained police officer choose to use a potentially harmful weapon to incapacitate protestors if he really only wanted them to move? If the goal of university police was to make the students move, tear gas would have been employed. It appears Officer Pike instead chose to hurt protesters for merely exercising their constitutional rights.

This was a case of university police operating on a university campus in response to a request to remove a few tents erected in the quad. None of the usual excuses for police misconduct were alleged to exist here. Police were not operating in a high crime area. No known gang members were involved. No shots were fired. It appears no one was even yelling at police. None of the officers were in fear for their lives. Video footage of the incident shows Officer Pike nonchalantly spraying students sitting with their heads down then attempting to move several protesters while they were incapacitated. Doing so meant that although incapacitated, protesters could still be charged with resisting arrest. There is simply no place for such abuse in any civilized society.

Following the incident, Pike and two other campus police officers, including the campus police chief, were placed on paid administrative leave and U.C. President Mark G. Yudof ordered a review of all university police training. Unfortunately, the police response to abuses such as this is generally "we are going to do retraining." Is retraining going to stop such misconduct in the future? Would the perpetrator of any other violent assault, such as domestic violence, merely be retrained?