OPINION & EDITORIAL
Brutality tarnishes badge
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Robert Phansalkar:
- 'Think, Respect' does neither, preempts rational action (November 14, 2007)
- 'Taser this' editorial tame compared to past (October 2, 2007)
- Lawmakers' plan bigger problem than baggy pants (September 18, 2007)
- Right-wing judicial activism fault of liberal tactics (August 31, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Cops waste time crashing parties (October 8, 2007)
- More unlucky than unlawful (September 28, 2004)
- Why don't we do it in the road? (March 30, 2005)
- Don't buy police detox rhetoric (October 29, 2007)
- With great power... (October 17, 2007)
by Robert Phansalkar
Monday, November 13, 2006
The already infamous Los Angeles Police Department just made an addition to its less-than-glamorous résumé: A video of two police officers mercilessly beating a man surfaced on YouTube.
The man, William Cardenas, is shown being restrained and beaten while telling LAPD officers that he cannot breathe. The BBC reported that officers claimed that Cardenas "resisted arrest and [that] they feared he would try to grab their guns."
This disturbing footage unfortunately conjures up memories of another brutality episode closer to home that seemingly dropped out of the consciousness of Milwaukeeans until its recent revival by federal prosecutors.
Frank Jude, the Milwaukee man who was brutally beaten Oct. 24, 2004, had criminal charges brought against the accused police officers, but was denied by an all-white jury in Milwaukee courts.
After Jude's case resulted in a not-guilty verdict, Jude filed suit in federal court against the city and the police officers for allegedly violating his civil rights. After filing suit, federal prosecutors charged two of the police officers with violating and conspiring to violate Jude's civil rights during the beatings.
For Jude, the case brings hope to an otherwise hopeless situation: The police may be held accountable for the beatings. But prosecutors will have to deal with the all too familiar "wall of silence" that hindered justice from being accomplished in the Jude case.
The wall of silence is the barrier between police officers and investigators investigating police misconduct. Police officers, the very people sworn to uphold the law, inhibit investigations specifically when it deals with another officer's wrongdoing.
Aside from its obvious hindrance to justice, its effects are certainly damaging.
As injurious to a city's reputation as a police officer found guilty of using excessive force is, it is even worse when the police are incapable of punishing themselves.
The public's confidence and respect for police is something constantly on the minds of the city officials and cases such as Jude's only threaten that confidence. Jude, who is bi-racial, saw the ugly face of police brutality, and his case threatened the already tenuous racial relationships in Milwaukee.
It is bad enough that many minorities already have fading confidence in law enforcement, but to compound that with police officers who fail to uphold their duties despite obvious injustice is to seriously impede their respect for law.
When a system lets you down continually, it is hard to believe that you would respect the institutions that purportedly protect you.
That is precisely what the Los Angeles situation poses, as once again police officers have been exposed for using excessive force.
In a context where we are attempting to establish the meaning of law in countries abroad, we certainly could allocate some of our focus on our own legal system.
When we fail to apply law to our own police officers, judges or political leaders, we fail to uphold the spirit of the rule of law. In this instance, people privy to the institutions, which affect the lives of people like Jude and Cardenas are abusing it for their own advantage.
In both of these cases, officials have denounced the abuse of power; that simply is not enough for citizens to be satisfied with the situation.
Ideally, these situations would never occur, but the reality is that they do. And when they do, our response must amount to more than publicly decrying the acts to curry better favor with the public.
One can only hope that in future cases, such as Jude's federal trial or Cardenas' potential trial, police officers will continue their commitment to justice and not abuse power to protect their fellow officers' misdeeds.
Robert Phansalkar (phansalkar@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in languages and cultures of Asia and political science.
Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 1:39pm):
The folks who put this video on YouTube decided that they were going to let us see only 19 seconds of the Los Angeles incident.
Let's put this in context. These LAPD officers were not sitting around drinking iced tea and watching a video on their computers. They were in a street fight with a suspect. Here, buried at the end of the Los Angeles Times story is the summary of the police account of what led up to the punches:
"According to the police account, the officers were on a patrol just before 6 p.m. when they spotted Cardenas drinking beer with two friends at the corner of Fountain Avenue and Gordon Street. Schlegel recalled that Cardenas, an alleged member of a Hollywood street gang, had an outstanding felony warrant on a charge of receiving stolen property.
"After pulling up in their patrol car, Farrell ordered the men to put their hands above their heads, but Cardenas ran. Schlegel caught up to him a quarter of a block away and tripped him. The officers said Cardenas then took several swings at them and resisted their efforts to control and handcuff him. According to the police report, several witnesses confirmed that Cardenas swung at the officers."
Finally, after the suspect takes several swings at them, they have him on the ground. He continues to resist. It appears he may be attempting to bite the officer. Under these circumstances is LAPD officer using excessive force?
I say the officer is absolutely justified.
Anonymous (November 13, 2006 @ 9:50pm):
"I say the officer is absolutely justified."
A little corporal punishment? Just in case he gets off on a technicality?
Disgusting, maybe we should bring back flogging?
