I don't think this will go well for the arresting officers. What a horrible ordeal for the professor but good on her for standing up for herself.

to a white person robbing a liquor store?

Where has she been all her life...

Sadly there is a little truth to this, if you are Black in America you must remember you are a 2nd class citizen, according to many

Angry Yet?

Meeting the public and serving them fries with a smile, perhaps....

He is up shit creek.

In my college town, for example, some of the campus cops were turned down by the city police department. Yikes.

obviously not quantified to deal with the public in any fashion.

That is exactly what it is!

ASU needs to rein in their cops. That was outrageous.

My son's gf goes to ASU, better let her know that she needs to stay on the sidewalk.

always look so much like skinhead jack-booted thugs?

skinhead jack-booted thugs?

And his bank account. If he does anything in this matter it will only be after an immense amount of public backlash.

I'm trying to contact some college friends to see if there will be any protests. I hope there will be because this is fucking ridiculous. I know exactly where the incident happened since I ride by there several times a week. Because of construction, the street is a dead end and there is almost zero traffic. I see people jaywalking across it all the time. Hell, I've jaywalked across it drunk on at least one occasion.

That Ferrin was clearly in the wrong even before he threw her to the ground. Hope Dr. Ore receives some vindication.

I was on that campus not too long ago. And I jaywalked routinely and I swear I even remember seeing cops around! There aren't enough pedestrian stripes anyway. But being white, I must have passed the profiling test.

they're the same everywhere.

but the disease is spreading fast.

being black and driving, or being black and breathing in "merica" is a crime. This country proves on a daily basis how much it hates me. I am black and a woman, so it's a double whammy for me. I cannot love a country that hates me this much.

I don't hate you.

We will eventually get past this. But people like this Officer (if you can call him that) are not helping things at all, are they? Please hang in there with some of us old white people. We do care!

minding her own business, crossing a street. How are the "police" keeping the public safe in this case?

She should sue both of them, and the campus agency.

2014-200-1990-1980-1970-1960-1950-1940-1930-1920-1910-1900-....................1620. Geez, I am so sick of this shit. Militarized idiots passing for 'peace officers'. What a fucking joke. Amerikkka has always been a brutal country....to the threat posed by all red, black, yellow, brown and yes martha, even some whites who align themselves with those other colors out a sense of decency and conscience....viola liuzzo comes to immediate mind....

But I've also never been stopped for walking in the street. I doubt many of us have.

in the background a little while after the professor is saying that everybody does it and the cop is threatening to slam her into the car over an incident of jaywalking. With all the guns out there, this overbearing cop one day is going to go too far and a family member is going to blow off his head. Personally, even though the cop is an overaggressive asshole, I would have cooperated if I had been the lady. I've had too many cops pull guns on me for no reason when they stop me in my car. I always put both hands on the steering wheel and tell them I'm going to move them to reach into my glove compartment. I try to cooperate as much as I can, even if they are disrespectful. Some of these cops are on a hair trigger and have anger issues and also bad drug or alcohol problems. I once represented a member of the LAPD in a work comp case. He had been driven insane by the job and he was a walking chem lab and taking oxycontin and you name it for his physical injuries suffered on the job.

from war exposure. There seem to be a lot of recent veterans taking on law enforcement positions. That's not the place for war zone PTSD.

n/t

You think if she'd been so little blonde coed she would have been challenged? I guess we all know the answer to that one.

Notice how the first cop is grinning like an idiot when he pushes the woman (in the skirt) over the hood of the car. I would take this case to court and show it to a jury of women and men with daughters. I think the University that employees these guys would lose. I would show the jury a close up/slow motion of the first cop's face as he is pushing her over the hood of the car. He was getting off on it. He forgot about the camera watching him. Or maybe he thought no one would ever see the footage.

I would also be interested in hearing exactly what he was doing with his "leg" that had the poor victim so distressed. And if he has had any other complaints from women about harassment or if any other women come forward to say that he has harassed them.

trying to avoid construction and Bam! Out of the blue some idiot with a badge needs to show how much power he can wield with said badge.

I don't hate police.. just the ones who abuse the public trust.

because they know they get away with it. There needs to be a massive overhaul of the way cops are hired and trained, and a serious increase in the consequences for abusive cops. That's the only way shit like this will stop.

And I attended ASU. I am very ashamed of this kind of behavior by the ASU "faux" police.

My Chinese-American friend and I were walking down Telegraph in Berkeley and there was a cross street that had a "don't walk" signal.

Neither of us really processed the red signal, and when we got to the other side, there was a cop who asked if we had seen him standing there before we crossed.

We said "no," and after a short and polite chat about minding the signals, we were on our way.

Which in no way relates to anything resembling white (or honorary white) privilege. I'm sure the guy could have just as easily beaten us into the sidewalk.

It's so not germane to the topic of white privilege that I'm not sure why I am even bringing this up.

"Put your hands behind your back. Put your hands behind your back. Put your hands behind your back."

She has a pretty good argument against a resisting arrest charge, as he never told her that he is placing her under arrest. He grabs her hand and begins forcing it behind her. She's obviously also concerned about the location of his leg. Even after throwing her to the floor, he never announces that he is placing her under arrest. When she says "You have no right to be touching me," she's technically quite correct, as he is "arresting" (in the general sense) her without announcing that he's arresting her in a legal sense. Now, certainly there are types of arrests that don't require notification. But this wouldn't seem one of them. He should have said "I am placing you under arrest for (obstruction of a public thoroughfare, or whatever). Place your hands behind your back." But he never said that; he just began a physical process without advising her of what was going on.

It's also notable that Ore actually documents the beginning of the confrontation here, and Ferrin not only doesn't deny it, but confirms it. Ore says something to the effect of "And you pull me over asking 'Do you know what this is? This is a street.'" Ferrin then says "Do you know that this is a street," essentially confirming the way that the interaction started. In other words, Ore, walking home from teaching a college class at a Research 1 university, was asked by a police officer "Do you know what this thing is called? It's called a street." That was the moment of condescension, racism, and disrespect that seems to have kicked off this whole thing.

But again, he never announced that she was under arrest.

It's protocol for a police officer to begin handling a person without announcing why? A person who is not fleeing, during a stop for a violation? It would seem basic protocol would dictate that he announce and advise that he's effecting an arrest. He never does that, not once. She has every right and reason to be deeply concerned by his physical handling of her absent a directly stated intention to place her under arrest.

you don't even have to be arrested to be detained and brought to a holding cell, what exactly is "arresting in the general sense" ?

you get mouthy with an officer, expect him to be an ass, you pull your arm away when he is giving you a directive, expect to be treated roughly, kick the officer, ......game over.

"Let me finish then you can speak" ..... yeah just plan on the cop turning into an ass.

The officer's tone is not racist or hateful as many want to believe. He's a cop, doing his job,....... not debating on an internet forum. She'll get to enjoy this little headache for weeks, and it will end up costing her a few bucks.

"I see other people do it all the time" ............. yeah, that usually backs a cop down, well played professor.

which is a privilege, not a right).

You only need to show ID if you are "detained" for a suspicion of committing a crime. This police officer refused to answer the professor when she asked if she were being detained. He said she had been "contacted."

If you're not detained, then you can walk away and you don't have to answer anything.

I thought the same thing. She wasn't driving. She doesn't have to produce "papers."

And the US Supreme Court is cool with it:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZS.html

Assessing the Supreme Court's ruling on giving ID to police
Michael C. Dorf
FindLaw Columnist
Special to CNN.com
Thursday, June 24, 2004 Posted: 3:57 PM EDT (1957 GMT)




FOR THE PUBLIC External site icon

Legal commentary from FindLaw's Writ External site icon
LAW DICTIONARY External site icon


(FindLaw) -- In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Larry Dudley Hiibel.

Hiibel had violated a Nevada statute that requires persons temporarily detained on "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity to identify themselves to a police officer.

Hiibel -- who claimed he had done nothing wrong and was simply the victim of mistaken identity -- believed he had no obligation to tell the officer his name.

But the Court found that neither Hiibel's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures, nor his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, was violated. (The high court's ruling)

In so doing, the Court took some liberties in construing its own past precedents, prompting four justices to dissent. But despite its technical deficiencies, the Hiibel decision does not threaten civil liberties.

Nor does it, as some commentators have suggested, pave the way for a system of compulsory national identification cards. Moreover, even if it did, such a system would not necessarily be unwise or unconstitutional.

yourself if you're officially "detained" on suspicion of a crime.

The police officer refused to say if Prof. Ore was detained or not.

Go ahead and beat up our women of color . . . they deserve it, apparently.

This was about 2 years ago and it happened around 10 PM, the cop was being a douche but I took the ticket. I knew if I argued with him I would have ended up in jail. And when I went before a judge the judge through it out and basically made comments about how the cop was wasting his and the courts time with worthless tickets.

Let them feel the heat.

In AZ you aren't required to SHOW identification documents. You are, however, required when asked to identify yourself by telling what your full name is. The officer saying that she was required to SHOW her ID and that it is the law isn't true. She IS, however, required to identify herself by full name which she didn't do.

Her arrest was lawful since she didn't identify herself as requested though she wasn't required to show any ID document - she WAS required to tell him her name, and at no point in the entire confrontation did she do so.

Her complaints of his disrespecting her really grate on my nerves since throughout - and the officer allowed it to go on for quite some time - was her doing the disrespecting by continually talking over him even when she asked him a question not allowing him to answer, and preventing him from doing so because she never stopped for breath during her entire monologue. I can totally understand the officer finally getting fed up and arresting her. And once she was arrested (which she should have expected to happen given that she refused to listen to him) continually talked over him, refused to identify herself and harassed him for being disrespectful to HER when it was HER doing the disrespecting by continually talking over him and refusing to comply with identifying herself. She even tried to engage some passer-by who wasn't a police officer, and she didn't care if he was or not further ignoring anything the officer said to her.

Once under arrest there's no question that she continually resisted arrest. Though it may not have been smart for the officer to threaten if she continued to resist that he'd slam her on the hood of the car he CAN do that if it is necessary to get the person under arrest to stop resisting. Why she complained to the officer about what she was wearing just to be handcuffed is anyone's guess... if just being handcuffed does something to your clothing to expose your private regions than you aren't wearing enough clothing, for heaven's sake. And if she was worried about being exposed by wearing a short skirt than she should have simply STOPPED resisting arrest instead of harassing the officer by saying "do you see what I'm wearing?" as if that somehow makes one immune to being handcuffed. Kicking him in the shin afterward was just flat out dumbassery, and it's no wonder that she was charged for assaulting an officer because of that. If after being forced to the ground in order to handcuff her that her skirt road up and exposed her nether regions I can it both ways that the officer might want to cover her by pulling her skirt down over her exposed nether regions or NOT doing that since that might be interpreted as being sexual contact... according to her attorney manipulating her upraised skirt so her nether regions would not be exposed she took to be sexual contact rather than the officer trying to cover her exposure to preserve her dignity. Personally, I'd rather have an officer attempt to cover my exposed nether regions rather than leave them out there for anyone to see.

Further, in the video she continually tells him to move his leg when he had her pinned against the back of the car trying to handcuff her. His leg would have been between hers since that's proper police procedure and necessary to keep the resisting person from being able to use their legs to kick at the officer while being handcuffed. If she didn't like his leg being there, tough, she would never have been handcuffed in the first place if she just told the officer her name and quit disrespecting HIM by continually talking over him. She put her own self in this position from the start.

Not one bit of this would have happened if she just said who she was by NAME (saying you're a professor at the university is NOT identifying yourself, and it wasn't for identification purposes that she said that - she said it because she expected to be treated with kid gloves just because she's a professor) and didn't disrespect the OFFICER by listening to him and not continually talking over him while he was trying to talk to her and get her to follow lawful orders. If it's one thing I can't fucking stand from anyone is being talked over, and doing that to anyone is not only disrespectful it's maddening when it happens to you. I can totally understand why her doing this to the officer finally got him fed up with her and putting her under arrest... he lasted a hell of a lot longer with her harangue than I would have. I would think a professor at a university would also understand that, particularly one that supposedly is an expert in cultural studies and communication.

Her being thrown to the ground in the video is because she almost got loose from the officer, and is normal police procedure to reasonably force someone resisting arrest to comply. I'm not seeing that she was "thrown" to the ground but that she was forced to the ground. And there is no question whatsoever that she resisted arrest. When you continually resist arrest just what the hell do you expect is going to be the result?

The officer said she was walking down the middle of the street, and she didn't refute him. She didn't say she was crossing the street or walking on the street as close as possible to whatever was obstructing the sidewalk. The officer isn't blind, and could see it was necessary to walk on the street at the side to avoid the obstruction, so I'm not seeing why he would have stopped her for obstructing a public thoroughfare if she wasn't in actuality walking down the middle of the street. And she at no time refuted him when he said she was walking down the middle of the street thereby obstructing a public thoroughfare. Therefore, I believe it is logical to assume she was in fact walking down the middle of the street obstructing a public thoroughfare and why the officer stopped her in the first place.

The only thing the officer got wrong here was telling her she had to SHOW ID because it was the law. Clearly, though she wasn't interested in the fine point of the law in showing ID documents or merely telling an officer your full name since she never brought this up but continually talked over him right up to her being handcuffed... and never once gave him her name.

As for his threatening to slam her on the hood of the car if she didn't stop resisting though maybe not the smartest thing to say, it's certainly better to threaten it in order to get someone to stop resisting rather than just doing it because you otherwise weren't able to stop someone from resisting. It's plain he didn't WANT to slam her on the hood or anything else physically harmful than necessary to arrest her. And he wouldn't have had to go through ANY of that if she just DIDN'T resist arrest.

Sorry, not feeling sorry for this woman at all. Just as I didn't with the white student that did the same thing in Texas. Refuse an officer's lawful orders, talk over them and resist arrest, too bad for you.

It's simple really. If you live in a state where identifying yourself by your full name to a police officer on request is the law and one asks you to, DO it. DON'T yap over what the officer is trying to say to you, and DON'T resist arrest.

FYI, there is no state that requires a person to show ID documentation unless they are driving or on an airplane. There are 24 states (including AZ) that a person is required to identify themselves by name to an officer upon request if there is reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes#Obligation_to_identify

http://www.knowmyrights.org/knowledgebase/faq/police-encounters/when-do-i-have-to-show-id

This is pathetic. A couple of sentences in and I thought, surely there will be a sarcasm thingy and then I realized, you're dead serious. We can never get rid of bad cops with attitudes like this! Jeeezus! This is unreal. Then the tell tell ending, if the victim was white you'd feel the same way. Lol.

Wow!

Because I'm actually looking at the video and what occurred. Apparently, you didn't.

1) She was walking down the middle of the road. The officer told her that, and she did not dispute this.

2) She was asked for her ID, though not required to SHOW a document of identification she IS required to tell the officer her full name - she didn't at any time.

3) She continually talked over the officer throughout the entire thing not listening to his orders and continuing to refuse to give her name.

4) The officer got fed up and arrested her lawfully for obstructing a public thoroughfare by walking down the middle of the street which she did not refute and for refusing to identify herself which she IS required by law to do.

5) She continually resisted arrest and continued to harangue the officer.

6) She kicked the officer in the shin once she was finally handcuffed.

All right there in the video.

The only thing the officer did wrong was tell her she had to SHOW ID (ie: "let me see your ID&quot . Again, she was not required to show an identity document, but she WAS required to identify herself to the officer by giving him her full name, which she did not do at any time.

I'm well aware that when it comes to the police here people will always think they're guilty and side with the "victim" regardless of what's in front of their eyes. Too bad that people here don't like to be called out when they're full of it even when there is video evidence that refutes them.

She was improperly told that she had to provide her driver's license. So it appears that her person was seized without cause, violating her rights. I do agree with you that she behaved in a disrespectful and even annoying fashion, but the officer was the one who was originally disrespectful, and she initially just wanted him to acknowledge that. Handcuffing her was ridiculous. He should have remained calm and told her that if she did not provide her name, she would be handcuffed and detained. Better still, he should have been patient and got her to identify herself and not even threatened her with being handcuffed or arrested.

1) When you see somebody perhaps committing a minor infraction, pull up to them an mock them aggressively, with as much condescension as possible. Ex: If you see somebody crossing a thoroughfare in the middle rather than at a crosswalk, ask them "Hey dummy, do you know what a street is? Do you know what a sidewalk is, dummy?"

1a) Actually, only perform Step 1 selectively, preferably with members of minority groups and women, the first because you want to contact them anyway, since they're probably criminals, and the second because it really puts the fear into 'em to be confronted by random men in unmarked cars at night. If you can get a twofer, all the better!

2) Once you stop the guilty black or brown perpetrator, don't tell them why they're being detained. Don't tell them that they're being detained.

3) Double down on the insults. Like this: Do you know it's a street? That really goads 'em!

4) Incorrectly ask for the black or brown perpetrator to produce an ID rather than a name. Naturally, don't tell them why. Continue not to tell them that they are being detained, or why.

5) If they refuse to provide an ID for even 20 seconds, begin effecting the arrest, but don't tell the guilty black or brown perpetrator that he or she is being arrested. Just start grabbing at them like.

5a) If it's a woman, really get your knee up in her vagina area and tell them you're gonna slam them on the car. That puts 'em nice and at-ease like. Also, it is protocol to disable them or something, blah blah.

6) Never say you are arresting them. Repeat: NEVER announce that the perpetrator is under arrest. That gives 'em time to make a decision. Just keep pulling their hands and physically forcing them. If they seize up at this development, it's cha-CHING for the county and the jails. Charge up, baby!!!! (Always Be Charging)

7) Do nothing to defuse the situation, ever. Them black and browns are likely to shoot you, you know. Fucking gangbangers.

8) Aw yeah, son! It's takedown time! Throw them little fuckers down!

8a) Eventually, I guess, you have to let them up. Continue not telling them what's going on.

9) If a woman in a dress, really grab at that crotch. Women who've just been thrown to the ground and had their dress hiked up, exposing their underwear for everybody standing around watching are always real keen on your hand reaching toward their genital area. It calms down the situation. Just kidding: they'll probably try to push you offr: Cha-CHING! Felony assault on a police officer! (Always Be Charging!)

Fucking puke. Just PUKE. And ignore.

Not surprised very sad, walking while Black (WWB) didn’t she say the sidewalk was obstructed?

we need to fight for those folk too