'Warrior' bent in LAPD-Critics: Too many cops think beating some suspects acceptable

L A Daily News ^ | 12 NOV 2006 | BETH BARRETT, Staff Writer

[radar101]

The emergence of a video showing a Los Angeles police officer repeatedly punching a suspect in the face has thrust the LAPD into the national spotlight again over officers' use of force and whether the department has fostered a "warrior" culture despite more than a decade of reforms.

The video, which surfaced on the Internet site YouTube.com last week, shows one officer holding down William Cardenas, 23, as another places his knee on Cardenas' neck and punches him a half-dozen times.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Los Angeles Police Department have launched investigations. Police and city officials have called the video disturbing and said last week that they are waiting for results of a full investigation.

But even while civil rights and law enforcement officials acknowledge broad progress in curtailing officer misconduct since the videotaped 1991 beating of black motorist Rodney King by four white officers sparked national outrage, they say a rift remains between what police view as legitimate force and what the public sees as an abuse of power.

"I think the real problem is that what we're getting whipped into a lather over is not a problem (for some officers)," said civil rights attorney Connie Rice, who chaired a panel that reviewed the department seven years after officer misconduct in its Rampart division in 1999.

"They're looking at the video and saying, `What's your question?' We're looking at it, and (Cardenas) has 250 pounds of cops on him, the guy can't breathe and they're punching him in the face."

Force `necessary'?

Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke University professor of law and political science who evaluated the department in the wake of the Rampart scandal for the police union, said the incident underscores a national debate: "Was the force reasonably necessary under the circumstances?"

Chemerinsky said the LAPD has changed significantly, but cases appearing to involve unreasonable force are the vestiges of a department that for decades has relied on a "Dirty Harry" policing style to bridge a gap in resources.

"That culture continues to exist," he said.

Police spokesman Lt. Paul Vernon acknowledged there may be a "disconnect," but blamed it more on a "naive understanding" of what is legal and often necessary to apprehend difficult suspects.

"You have to ask, if you're in a life-and-death struggle, what would you do?" Vernon said. "And police have extra tools and training."

Officers are authorized to use only the force necessary to subdue a suspect, but there is a "continuum" that allows a range of tactics, including "distraction strikes," if a suspect continues to resist arrest, Vernon said.

He said the department has continued to revamp its approach to uncooperative or combative suspects, including modifications to equipment and training.

Options for officers

After the King case, the department began using collapsible batons and increased use of pepper spray.

"There's been a great number of changes in the force options that they have," Vernon said.

A year ago, after the fatal shooting of 13-year-old Devin Brown in a vehicle-involved incident, officers were retrained in how to avoid a moving vehicle. After the videotaped beating of car theft suspect Stanley Miller by an LAPD officer using a 2-pound metal flashlight, the department began using smaller flashlights.

All officers also have been sent back to "arrest and control" school over the past five years after research showed most fights between officers and suspects ended up on the ground where grappling tactics often are most effective.

"What you saw on the videotape was exactly that. Those officers on the ground were grappling (with the suspect)."

In the recent video case, the LAPD has filed a complaint against Officer Patrick Farrell, who is seen on tape hitting Cardenas in the face, and his partner Officer Alexander Schlegel. Both officers have been placed on administrative duty pending an investigation.

Schlegel has testified that the Aug. 11 incident began when he recognized Cardenas as a member of the Gordon Street Locos gang who was wanted on an outstanding felony warrant for possession of a stolen gun.

According to the testimony at a Sept. 14 preliminary hearing, Cardenas ran when the officers confronted him. Schlegel testified that the officers chased and caught him and were trying to control Cardenas, who was resisting arrest and trying to grab their gun belts.

But questions also have surfaced over Schlegel's testimony and police report in the case.

In his testimony, Schlegel said he left out of his report the "three times" Farrell struck Cardenas because he was calling dispatch and didn't see the blows struck. After watching the video in court, however, Schlegel testified he had seen Farrell hit Cardenas. The video, however, clearly shows Farrell striking Cardenas five times.

Threats perceived

Ultimately, Rice said, the central issue is not reforming officer training and tools, but reconsidering how officers make "threat assessments."

"LAPD has their threat-assessment filter calibrated high," Rice said. "You get a use of force in response to a threat that looks excessive for the threat."

Rice said officers increasingly are discussing what constitutes appropriate use of force, but face obstacles ranging from thin ranks and violent suspects to unsupportive neighborhoods.

"Here's what's changed: 15 years ago, 85 percent of the force would have said Rodney King was a `good' beating, that it was in policy; 85 percent would have said the use of force (with) Stanley Miller was legitimate," Rice said. "You fast forward (to today) and one-third of the force would say it was unreasonable, and another third would say, let's see the investigation."

Still, the video comes just months after a federal judge refused to lift an LAPD consent decree imposed five years ago in the wake of the Rampart scandal. Provisions of the decree compel the department to track complaints against officers.

And the video also comes just four months after an independent report noted that while the department had made significant reforms, it remains at risk.

The report warned that city leaders had failed to adequately beef up the force, end LAPD's "warrior policing" mentality, and address entrenched social problems.

"If the city continues its failure ... to end the devastating `spiral of failure' that seeds police-public eruptions and corruption, then it can expect more of both," said the report, which grew out of cover-ups and crimes by former Rampart anti-gang officers.

Civil-rights attorney Carol Sobel said that while some things have changed in LAPD's approach to force, officers continue to rationalize the use of old-school techniques with suspects such as gang members and the homeless.

"The problem and the way it hasn't changed is the justification made that with certain kinds of people, ... they're fair game."

beth.barrett@dailynews.com

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

Remember when you got to carry a sap?

[ArtyFO]

I guess they need more night operations. Less light for cameras.

[Concho]

The main problem I am seeing with this incident is that there is no reporting going on of what the perp did to get into po-lice custody in the first place. Even though I have a very low opinion of cops in general, there are certain types of people loose on the street that could benefit from an attitude adjustment.

[Blake#1]

Why didn't Cardenas comply with the police? If they ask/ordered me to stand still and put my hands, up I would. This is not a case of police brutality, it is a case of a suspect not complying with civil authority. Lawlessness and terror follows Cardenas if these types are not stopped!

[xcamel]

OK there BETH BARRETT...
If a thug is about to mug/beat/rape/rob you would you:

A) Hope the cop beats the hell out of him
-or-
B) Talk nicy-nice to him so he has time to jab that knife in your gut an run away...

[radar101]

I still have mine.

[Enterprise]

The Oakland Raiders have a sapp on their team.

[psychoknk]

Nice False Dilemma. If a thug is about to rob you, there are no cops around. In fact, it has been demonstrated a few times that the police feel they have no duty to protect you/prevent crime; they feel that they only have to respond once a crime has been committed. On the flip side, the cops are known to be brutal towards black people. Remember Abner Louima?

[G-Bear]

If people would look at the perpetrator instead of the police, they would see the perp is not yet handcuffed, and is still resisting.

[CGTRWK]

Maybe it's just me, but several men holding down someone who is no longer a threat and beating his face in doesn't say warrior it says gang of thugs.

[xcamel]

All those anecdotes strung together to make a false premise..
You must have a 5 or 6 star rating over at DUmmieland.

[Gideon Reader]

This is the way it is. (I am somewhat intolerant of amature LEO's)
I was a law enforcement officer for a number of years.
From rookie patrolman up thru third line supervision.
For more than 34 years.

The action of an arrest is simply taking an individual(s) into custody and/or preventing the continuation of a prohibited or proscribed activity.

The use of appropriate force from verbal through deadly force is clearly delineated, with written benchmarks and red lines codified.

The use of the minimum force necessary to effect the arrest is clearly sanctioned.
More than that or the gratitous use of force or violence is NOT appropriate and may be a felony in itself.

Short title: You don't break the law to enforce the law.

The subject is custody and under control you cease the use of force. Period. There is no real excuse, regardless of the offense.

[radar101]

O K...How would YOU get handcuffs on him

Are you sure he doesn't have a knife or handgun in those baggy pants?

[Your suspect has a Felony Warrant for possessing a stolen handgun]

--Are are you ready for a brush with suicide?

[Mad Dawg]

In fact, it has been demonstrated a few times that the police feel they have no duty to protect you/prevent crime; they feel that they only have to respond once a crime has been committed.

"feel"? "FEEL"? What the heck is that?

With respect, nothing of the kind has been "demonstrated". What HAS been demonstrated is that the police have no legal liability if they fail to protect you from a crime or to prevent a particular crime -- because they simply are UNABLE to prevent all crime. The cops I used to work with HATE that they are almost always, by the nature of the job, playing catch up.

You've got to get serious about thinking what can be done with a finite number of officers with a finite budget.

And you've got to make a distinction between feeling and other modes of intra-psychic activity, for example, reasonable thought. This is unacceptably sloppy of you.

Further to say that "the cops are known to be brutal" because of one terrible case is logocally fallacious. The fallacy (and I don't need to go to wikipedia for this stuff) is "judging from the specific to the general".

Ever hear of Willy Horton? Because he, a black man, while on furlough from prison, committed an outrageously brutal rape and murder would it be right for me to say "Black men are known to be brutal"? Of COURSE not.

It is just as outrageous of you to say what you said -- outrageous, offensive, and illogical.

Posters to Free Republic are known to be idiots who ought not to be allowed to go on line without an adult human in attendance. Nope, my bad. SOME posters to Free Republic might meet that description. But the fact that a few can't reason their way out of a paper bag and don'[t know the difference between a feeling and a legal opinion is no indication that the vast majority can't reason pretty well.

---

[radar101]

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE: 835a. Any peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape or to overcome resistance.

A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from his efforts by reason of the resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested; nor shall such officer be deemed an aggressor or lose his right to self-defense by the use of reasonable force to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance.

[Mad Dawg]

Yep, we can't have cops beset with the warrior mentality. Nosirree! We need them to be beset with the VICTIM mentality. After all, they'll cost us a lot less if they just get crippled or killed. If they live, we'll have to make liability payouts.

Boy oh boy, just for once I'd like a week when it was known that no assault on a pundit or newsie would be punished by law. And during that week if they effectively defended themselves they'd be sued for gazillions of dollarsw and lose their jobs.

[Gideon Reader]

Yeah.
Had a 12oz Convoy Jack for a while.
It scared the crap out of me.
I was afraid I would kill someone with it.
Switched to a sanctioned 10 oz flat Texas Jack.
I use my Texas Jack for a paperweight.
I used to know a bunch of folks that enjoyed using them. A lot.
Good fighters. Lousy Cops.
I have little use for an impact weapon, and never did have respect for those who used them with abandon.
I personally am glad the 60's are over and done with.

[psychoknk]

Actually, they banned me from DU, but nice try at an ad hominem. And actually, stringing those anecdotes don't make a false premise. I was making statements and backing them up with examples. A false premise comes into play if I used it to draw a conclusion. However, you can live in your sheltered world where you feel the cops only attack the guilty and can do no wrong.

[RichInOC]

In defense of the cops, I think it's fair to say there are a lot more people in Southern California who need a beating from the cops than there are people who actually get one.

[xcamel]

And you can stick to your own private horror where cops only attack the innocent. Until you've warn a badge you have absolutely no clue whatsoever.

[Bernard Marx]

The subject is custody and under control you cease the use of force. Period. There is no real excuse, regardless of the offense.

Have you seen the video? That subject was in custody but far from being under control. He was resisting being handcuffed and seemed to have enormous strength. I've watched it carefully several times.

I don't know what led up to the situation nor whether the force used was "appropriate" to the situation. That's for the officials to determine. I do know that any report from a review board headed by Connie Rice [no, not Condoleeza Rice] wouldn't be worth the shot and powder required to blow it to hell. The Connie from L.A. is basically Jesse Jackson in a skirt. I'll pay attention to what the police and FBI have to say about it.

[CGTRWK]

Did you watch the same video I did?

The suspect is on the ground with two officers on him holding him down. His hands are in plain sight, and both of his arms are restrained. He is limp and not showing any resistance. Cuffing him would be as easy as snapping them on.

The officer is not interested in cuffing the suspect, he is interested in beating the hell out of him.

[psychoknk]

You've got to get serious about thinking what can be done with a finite number of officers with a finite budget.

I'd expect them to act upon restraining orders. According to this site, "in 1856 the U.S. Supreme Court declared that local law enforcement had no duty to protect a particular person, but only a general duty to enforce the laws." While this does fall in line with the 14th amendment which was passed later, it seems kind of dumb when you hear of cases where a woman files a restraining order against an ex-husband, he repeatedly violates the order, the cops don't do anything, and she eventually ends up dead.

Further to say that "the cops are known to be brutal" because of one terrible case is logocally fallacious. The fallacy (and I don't need to go to wikipedia for this stuff) is "judging from the specific to the general".

Granted, but I don't have the time to post all the cases, and nobody has done any statistical analysis on police brutality vs. race, probably because it would be impossible to get accurate reports of brutality. However, it is generally known that many cops are more suspicious of black people in general, and you hear about a beating of some sort every couple of months. While it is true that in most of these cases the guy was resisting arrest, at some point the cops gotta stop wailing on him.

[Mark]

I read this article in today's paper and noticed the day's poll question: 'Have you ever been harassed by LAPD?'

What's the definition of harassed?

Also, what's the definition of excessive force?

What is that occupation that has only perfect people?

[Mad Dawg]

The subject is custody and under control you cease the use of force. Period. There is no real excuse, regardless of the offense.

I would respectfully submit that sometimes one is not sure the subject is "under control". You cuff a guy, he's talking nice. You pop him in the back of the cruiser, and in a second he flips, start cursing and babbling, and kicks out your window, bending your door-frame in the process.

So you and your partner subdue him and secure his feet. While you are engaged in this activity, things can get a little confused, and the right video angle has you assaulting a guy whose hands are cuffed behind his back -- you brute, you.

That did happen to me. But then add to it that the guy is naked, obese, deranged, and he dies in custody, which sometimes happens. Some of us know about "excited delirium", but others, including some dispatchers and some policy makers, don't.

It's not cut and dried, and it takes a LOT of professionalism to get into a tussle with a subject under the influence of who knows what, who is totally unaffected by OC spray, and who fights with the strength of, well, of a lunatic, who is trying to get your firearm, and you know if you make one bad call you end up wounded or dead, and if you make another bad call you end up sued, scrutinized by the IAD, and in trouble.

Personally, I think the expectations of cops are excessive. Adrenaline is a dangerous drug.You know that. I know that. But if the Chief Deputy (or whoever) doesn't know that, if your lawyer can't sell it to a jury, why then you get your picture on the front page.

Short Title: If they pop they guy after he's effectively restrained (and they have to be the judges of that) then that's bad. If it's before he's effectively restrained, and he's resisting and going for their sidearm, no blame. (Okay, that wasn't very short.)

I think this is important and a lot of people are clueless. I freely admit I may be one of the clueless ones ....

[psychoknk]

I love the "you have no clue unless you've walked in those shoes" argument. That is the biggest load of bull. I know the police is important and probably the majority of officers aren't bad, but in some cities, they are pretty much totally corrupt and in areas with diverse populations you see cops act on an underlying set of racist beliefs. Is this wrong? I'd argue that profiling does have a place. As someone else mentioned, there are a finite set of resources that the police have to work with and targeting those resources would be beneficial. On the other hand, once you've subdued a prisoner, there is no reason to continue beating the s*** out of them.

[xcamel]

I suppose you have some special "second sight" that allows you to know what happened immediately prior and after that video was taken?
You're arguing a moot point so vehemently, I can't help but think you're anything but a closet liberal.

[D.P.Roberts]

It's not a "warrior" culture. Warriors don't have somebody hold a victim so they can hit him. That's what punks do. LAPD is a "punk" culture.

[TheCrusader]

"Even though I have a very low opinion of cops in general, there are certain types of people loose on the street that could benefit from an attitude adjustment."

We are in agreement here. But the problem is that far too many cops don't seem to care who the "perp" is or what he's done; once arrested too many people become punching bags for the cops to release their anger upon.

[Mad Dawg]

Granted, but I don't have the time to post all the cases, and nobody has done any statistical analysis on police brutality vs. race, probably because it would be impossible to get accurate reports of brutality. However, it is generally known that many cops are more suspicious of black people in general, and you hear about a beating of some sort every couple of months. While it is true that in most of these cases the guy was resisting arrest, at some point the cops gotta stop wailing on him.

What your first sentence giveth, your second taketh way. You admit that you made an unjustified slam against cops and then you try it again! "Well known" It used to be "well known" that blacks were genetically inferior (whatever that might mean) to white. Read Stevens Cornerstone Speech. It's a testimony to pseudoscience in the service of snap judgments.

Just how exactly, seriously, do you expect cops to enforce restraining orders? I'm serious. Let's have a workable plan including budgetary considerations.

Is he supposed to shadow the person who asked for the order, to make sure no harm comes to her (yeah, it's usually a her) or is he supposed to shadow the guy who is allegedly restrained? And where is this cop going to come from? Are you going to go to your County board of supervisors, or the mayor or whomever and say that we need to hire some more cops because we have x number of restraining orders in the county, and no way to enforce them?

You can stand back and expect all you want, and get all huffy when your expectations aren't met, and then make a bunch of characterizations about cops and racism. You can ask cops to avoid using reason (If the ONLY people who have ever threatened me were black, if the only guy ever to take a swing at me was black, and I've been just as "in your face" with whites as with blacks -- usually not very much -- most of my colleagues thought I was way too gentle, then how stupid am I NOT to have a heightened level of alertness when a black guy approaches me in less than a conciliatory way? Can we get real here?)

But the problem remains: Enforcement of protective orders is a man power issue. A judge can issue the order. But who hires, trains, pays the wages of, and deploys the officer? Can you envision trying to sell that to your city council?

[radar101]

Yes.
I hear the suspect yelling,"I can't breathe" (Report says OC Spray was used--had no effect. SUGGESTION: Suspect may be on drugs)
I see TWO Officers, struugling to get handcuffs on.
I see the suspect grasping at the throat of the officer above his head.

I ask you--You, the expert--How would YOU get the handcuffs on?

[Mad Dawg]

Okay, I really didn't set out to crowd you tonight, but HONESTLY ...
I love the "you have no clue unless you've walked in those shoes" argument. That is the biggest load of bull.

As long as you're running the PD better than anyone else, may I suggest you read up on adrenaline? And while you're at it, study up on stress in the LEOs life.

This is not about asking for pity, it's about reality. You're cruising along, expected to be polite and to know how to give directions to people speaking every language under the sun and to every place in the North American Continent, and to do so politely and with a smile. And most of the time that kind of interacting is fun.

But you never know when someone approaches you with a frown on his face whether he's going to ask for the time or pull a knife if you let him get too close.

And if he does pull a knife or take a swing or whatever, the first thing that goes through your mind is the departmental policy on the use of force and the force continuum and whether you will be sued or just suspended because your department is sued.You engage the citizen, and sooner or later the situation is resolved.

Then, if your department is run by a clown, you get treated like a suspect and cross-examined, while Internal Affairs or whoever looks for holes in your story. Somebody may take your gun, leaving you unarmed and insecure.

If your department is moderately civilized they may let you go home. You will be tempted to drink yourself into a stupor, but maybe you don't do that. People talk to you and you don[t hear them. You turn on the TV, but you couldn't tell anybody what's on if they asked. Your sleep is totally messed up for three days.

In some departments, internal affairs forgets to tell you that you've been cleared. Your wife doesn't understand why you can't talk about it just yet, and just because you suddenly are working your way through something rather large, cumbersone, and bulky doesn't mean your kids have stopped having broken hearts or bad grades or whatever the crisis du jour is.

And then you get to log on to Free Republic and be told that you're a sadistic bigot and that the fine upstanding citizens here have a low opinion of the guys on whom you sometimes have depended for your life and health.

And then people like you expect the beat cop to make decisions which would stymie Solomon in the time usually set aside for sub-atomic reactions; and you eagerly and happily say,"See THERE? I TOLD you they're all bums," when he fails to meet your exquisitely refined expectations.

There are inevitable neuropsychological changes and compromises secondary to stress. A sensisitve person can read ab out them and learn. Someone looking for a case against cops won't learn. Judgement is so fun and so attractive thatit sometimes gets in the way of perceiving reality. When that happens with cops, you can feel moraloly superior. When you do it though, it's another story ... Nah, I know I think a few weeks as a reserve in your local department might educate you just a little. Be sure to get back to me when you scrape an infant off the street and don't forget to tell me how insensitive cops are. Now if you'll please excuse me, I have to get back to terrorizing the populace. A fellow has to have SOME fun in life......

[Pete98]

How do you know he was no longer a threat?

[kstewskis]

bttt

[glasseye]

sadistic beat a helpless victim bump......

sociopaths should be separated from public service....

[DMZFrank]

In 28 years of police work, I have been in the type of "resisting suspect on the ground" arrests so many times that I can't remember them all. I saw nothing on that tape that would not have been legally justifiable under Illinois use of force guidlines. I suspect California has similar guidelines.

I will summarize the "use of force continuum" taught at the Chicago Police Academy.

1. Lowest level of force. Verbal command.

2. Non complying suspect not actively resisting: (not responding to directions, just sitting down, etc.): Pain Compliance techniques, hair pull, ear twist, pressure point hold.

3. Active resister; (Tensing muscles, pulling and running away,) pepper spray or stunning strike with hands

4. Unarmed fighting back against officer: Pepper spray, stun gun, impact weapon ASP, baton, flashlight

5. Resisting suspect using force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to officer or others: firearm or other means likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to offender.

You have no idea of the force required to subdue a cranked up amped up weight lifting PCP using ex con just out of the joint without smacking the snot out of him to make it easier to cuff him. I am 6'0" tall, 210 lbs, an ex Golden Gloves and Army AAU boxer, I worked out with weights 4 times a week, could bench 400 lbs, squat 550, dead lift 575 and it was NEVER easy for me.

[livius]

Very good post. Most people literally have no idea.

[Eagle Eye]

So do the Broncos.

[WesternPacific]

I wish the police critics could be given the opportunity to patrol the streets and enforce the law the way they propose the police should enforce it.

[Mad Dawg]

sociopaths should be separated from public service....

You do that, and they'll just run for office --- and win.

[Mad Dawg]

What we need is more fairness. The cops ought to spot the perp a couple of free hits, or maybe offer him their backup knife. Then it would be more even. It's just SEW unsporting this way.

Check it out:
Breeding a Victim Culture in LEOs