Crowd control at the RNC: Fifty million unanswered questions

A few things to consider here:

1. The RNC paid the premiums on a $10 million insurance policy for the police in St. Paul to pay for any lawsuits against the police brought by protesters. This has many implications.

2. If the police had let Thursday's march proceed undeterred to the prescribed “free speech zone” by the convention instead of blocking the protesters' path across the bridge would the protesters have been committing any crime other than petty misdemeanor jay-walking?

3. Is St. Paul's protest permitting law constitutional? Even if it is, if you view the protest crowd as individuals who all just happened to be attempting to walk peacefully to the designated “free speech zone” outside the convention, then didn't the police violate these people's First Amendment Rights?

It sure seems to me that preventing protesters from reaching a police and city sanctioned cage where citizens are supposed to exercise their First Amendment Rights by using Unlawful Assembly citations before the protesters can reach the cage is dubious.

Jeff –

I've got a list like this over at BitchPHD – more of a 'talking points for progressive media' list, but might be helpful.

My friend, Jason Johnson, was singled out as he stood at a protest, tackled, and tasered on the ground. So add tasering. Kare11 had it.

How many times did officers use tasers? On how many people? How many times did officers use pepperspray? Did they file reports on use of force, and if not, why the fuck not?

My list to date

* The Twin Cities became a police state for four days
* There were numerous unprovoked attacks by officers
* Sheriff Fletcher in trouble and possibly crooked and that motivated his behavior
* The police criminalized radical dissent, particularly with regards to anarchists
* Sub: Felony charges will impair their democratic rights
* Sub: Arrest records will follow people
* The important role of journalists society was not respected
* The RNC brought the methods of Iraq to Saint Paul
* Sub: The convention center security was like the Green Zone
* Sub: People who were in jail were hooded and abused like Abu Ghraib
* Sub: Overwhelming use of superior weaponry was the first choice of response
* The police were comical in their use of force
* Amnesty International says that human rights were likely violated
* ron paul had a mostly ignored totally peaceful action across town
* most charges are dismissed, most detainments not charged
* people detained were requred to give info to get away , getting on FBI database
* the corporate media buried the story
* the corporate media's coverage of the protest was all cops vs robbers, ignoring the antiwar message
http://bitchphd.blogspot.com

I have a lot of problems with how the city handled security.

But my main suspicion is about the broken windows at Macy's and on the squad car on Monday. It was the incident that law enforcement used as justification for their mobilization the rest of the week.

Why were there no police anywhere when the crowd with a couple of anonymous window-breakers hit the area? There were riot police on every corner who then immediately proceeded to shut off the entire parade route. Even after the windows were broken in the squad car, there were no police taping it off or surrounding it, journalists were sticking their cameras through the broken windows.
Either police communications failed completely, and they should be taken to task for that, or they purposely allowed windows to be broken to justify their behavior.

Also, MSM should be aware that being an anarchist is not a crime, democracy should be strong enough to allow dissenters, even ones that want to break a few windows (like we haven't seen that before in our history) without turning into an authoritarian police state.

Shame on Chris Coleman and RT Rybak.

A tear gas canister fired by police missed my head by inches on Thursday. People have died from being shot in the head with these canisters in the past, which is why they are supposed to be fired at the ground…

By making the political viewpoint of anarchy synonymous with terrorism, and pointing to a few minor examples of property destruction from Monday, the media has been able to justify the use of violent force by the SPPD against overwhelmingly non-violent protesters throughout the week.

If we are to have a democratic society, they must be held accountable with severe consequences.

“What would have happened if I had not jumped and the grenade had exploded at my feet? “

What would have happened if you, and your friends had listened to at least one of the several warnings the police gave the crowd that it was time to disburse? What would have happened if you and your friends had acted in good faith on the permits to march you were issued?

What would have happened if Saint Paul councilman Dave Thune had not worked so hard to thwart the efforts of the Sheriff's department to keep the trouble makers out of the way so peaceful protesters could peacefully protest?

History suggests that while you wouldn't have had the opportunity to photograph smoke grenades, you would have found something else to complain about.

I'm curious how often Triple-Chasers, say, do result in death — and how St. Paul police or the feds that likely called the shots here considered those risks.

Just think a bit. We went to Iraq to fight for democracy, and I spent time in Korea fighting for democarcy in that country. What had take place in St.Paul is a question I will bring up. What country will come to us and fight for democracy for us. Sad what the Republicans are doing, and some of the mega churches are right behind them. One of these days those mega churches will be like the radical muslims are in their countries. The constitution will be rewritten by the holy ones.

People have every right to assemble and protest peacefully. if you don't like that fact, i would suggest moving to say China or some other country that doesn't allow protest. However, I am a proud American, and one of the things that makes this country great is the fact that the people can say what they want, without having to fear being attacked by the police.

I agree completely, Mister; people do have the right to assemble and to protest. That's why they received permits to allow them to do just that. I was proud to watch people make full use of their first amendment rights.

Unfortunately, there are people out there that believe their right to protest trumps the right of others to assemble to engage in democracy. The police did a fine job of letting people protest while removing those who wanted to squash the rights of others.

I was out there every day last week, and didn't get pepper sprayed, arrested, tear gassed or molested in any way. It was real simple.

When the police said the time for permitted protest had expired, I left.

St. Paul got $50 million, huh? With any luck it'll cost them twice as much at that in lawsuits. And as for Minneapolis: I congratulate them on their utter lack of shame, dignity or scruples; and pitching themselves in with that long list of cities that will do anything for money, no matter how despicable.

Which of course means the police should be free and clear to beat them, fire explosives at them, electrocute them, use chemical weapons and eventually charge them with domestic terrorism.

I'm with you 1000%. When a girl holding up a peace sign, or even worse a flower does not obey the words of man in a riot helmet and body armor they have ever right to gas her in the face repeatedly, then smash her with batons and bicycles. These people need to learn how democracy works and I'm glad the heroic officers could teach them a lesson they won't forget!

I'm not law enforcement, but why don't you ask all those folks who disobeyed lawful orders, who intentionally damaged property, who planned to 'burn the Excel down', who planned to burn and hurt other innocents what the heck they were doing and why? Is damaging property and hurting other people really the way to peacefully protest or make a gentle statement? How are the police supposed to 'know' who is going to try to kill them and who isn't? Who is going to try to cause damage to property and who isn't? Keeping those questions in mind, how are they supposed to defend themselves and the people they've SWORN to protect?

Ajamo. Thank you!. I think Bill Clinton said it best at the Democratic Convention. People are more inspired by the power of our example than by examples of our power.

The police are trained to “know who is going to try to kill them” actually. You see, someone waves a gun or other weapon in your face and you can immediately tell that they are a trouble maker. Someone walks down the street chanting “peace now!” they are probably not a threat to you. Police academies across the nation have extensive courses in threat assessment and proportional response. Don't be foolish, of course they knew that these people were no threat to them. What they did was make sure that there were no dissenting opinions on display at the convention. Can't let the RNC look bad, now can we?

I have a big question for you. What exactly was the CIA doing here in the Twin Cities?

Have you ever noticed that the only quote-unquote “violence” occured from this breakaway group from Monday's demonstration, an hour before the actual demonstrators began? Ever notice that nothing else like that happened again? These reports of broken glass, smashed windshields, etc….why didn't that happen the rest of the week? Why don't we know any of these people's names? Where are they from? When is their court date?

Just asking a few silly questions. Blame it on the booze and that Jesse Ventura book that came out.

Read the Pioneer Press today ya goof. The maskies are off and arrests are occuring.

http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_10412791

There will be lots of spoiled, ignorant little children squirting lots of pretty tears in the coming weeks, and lots of parents that wished they had paid a little more attention to what Jr. was being taught in school paying some hefty legal bills.

sorry to play the undereducated overpowered idiot with no responsibility card but this is no different than the DNC 2000 in LA. It's simple, cops are overwhelming right-wing, racist, fascist, white males who beat their wives and given the opportunity to smash up some stinking hippies they will do it every time. It's bravery when its Tianemen square but it's just another day in St Paul. Maybe if McCain wins then dies and the Moose killer becomes president then she will uphold her secessionist convictions and allow us (California) to leave this nation of backwards racist religious fundamentalists.

I just waant to add a home remedy to the boys-in-black who just yesterday, were the boys-in-blue:

Helpful formula…how to remove blood stains off black uniforms:

Soak official garments in cold water for extensive period of time. Remove body from uniform of course before initiating the process. Your choice I suppose; whichever.

Wipe off attendant billy club with a damp cloth; preferably dipped in bleach. However, there's always a shadow outline that may remain. Blood is a hard stain to disolve. It may not all come out in the wash this time, no sir!

And, let's not forget helicopters, blackhawks and other military types overhead.

How many remotely piloted aerial vehicles (e.g. predator drones) were overhead?

Command and control, surveillance are also weapons.

How far are we from missile attacks on civilians targeted remotely?

Just like Afghanistan and Iraq.

My letter to the Mayors and City Councils:

Isn't this a fine kettle of fish? Your arrest of credentialed journalists covering a legitimate news event is being followed by the entire nation.

You see you have a few problems. Let me set the stage for why. Much of the nation is angry over :
1) governmental lack of transparency,
2) government ignoring our laws and Constitution,
3) government power used to hide actions in furtherance of the desires of those in power.

Whether or not you and/or your subordinate's intentions were above-board, you are still on the horns of a dilemma … you may not fully realize its nature. Let me make clear the depth of your problems:

- You can prosecute Amy Goodman, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar. But, you should be aware that defense funds are already being raised nationally via the internet. You may be aware how effective such fund raising efforts can be, such as, in the case of Barack Obama's $50 million a month.

- You can drop the case against Amy Goodman, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar. But, in that case, you will be under scrutiny and probably sued for false arrest, financed using the same methods as Barack Obama. It may not surprise you to know that many of the organizations active in Senator Obama's fund-raising are likely to be active in your case also. This financial effort would flow directly from the people and be unconnected to the Obama campaign. It will flow naturally because those interested in protecting civil rights and those supporting Senator Obama happen to coincide.

- You can discipline the arresting officers and drop the cases of Amy Goodman, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar. Such an action will be seen as scapegoating. That may get you off the hook. But it is unlikely, given the excessive pre-emptive actions you condoned regarding raids prior to illegal activities (backed by warrants to search for items every household contains).

- You can launch a gold-star commission to “investigate” overzealous enforcement and drop the cases of Amy Goodman, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar. This would have the advantage of being under your control so you can let it die a quiet death and possibly forestall further, outside investigation into the high-level decisions to violate the rights of U.S. citizens to protect a political party. Of course, you should be aware that the internet groups you have stirred up have very long memories, computerized calendars and big hard-drives to store the damning evidence of perfidy.

Good luck making your decision.

First of all, thanks for covering this, since the more mainstream (embedded?) media seemed uncomfortable even clearing their throats to begin mentioning excesses until everyone from out of town packed up and went home.

I had a slightly different – milder – experience (debba-dot-com) but I am wondering: Is it possible that the authorities, like protestors, had a few hand-picked agitators in their ranks, planning for a rumble and stirring things up? It's not outside the realm of possibility that if we're outsourcing military to for-profit concerns in the Middle East, we're outsourcing urban security here at home. If so, to whom?

So you only have the right to assemble and protest for a limited period of time? Sounds more like a privilege than a right…

my question would be: what is the definition of “riot”, and by extension, the definition of “intending to incite a riot”?

her camerawoman and producer for Democracy Now were arrested with felony charges of “intending to incite a riot”. The videos of i have seen of Nicole Salazar show her holding her camera and screaming PRESS! PRESS! as she is tackled by police officers. It appears as though she perhaps did not understand what the police were asking her to do, at worst; it in no way looks like she was “rioting” or about to riot or about to get anyone else to riot.

the problem is that without a definition of this word, it is possible for the police to arrest thousands of peaceful protestors for precisely what nicole did. if an officer asked me to head “West”, i would, unless facing the ocean, probably have no idea what he wanted and would have to stop and look at a shadow or the sun and figure out where i was and which way is west. would this moment of hesitation lead me to be charged with “rioting?”

Everyone has a right to assemble and speak, but nobody has the right to make everybody else stop and demand that others listen to them. When people are comming to town and promising damage, injury and disruption I think the Police should be perpared and unforturnately they would be held to task if they were not ready. The police do not create the situation, but they are tasked with reacting to the mess that others make. After all, how many time does one have to be told to clear the street, stop throwing bricks or leave an area. When ordered by Police to disperse its not exactly a suggestion, its something that a citizen has to do. Try reading state statues like 609.71 (Riot) 609.715 (Presence at an Unlawful Assembly) 624.72 (Interfere with the use of Public Property). or city ordinance 110.01 (obstructing traffic) and 111.01 (obstructing sidewalk)

These are laws people, and many of us violated them. We are not exempt from their enforcement just beacause we have a message to deliver. The laws do not sunset because the RNC is in town. If we were driving our car and a police car pulled up behind us with its lights on and directed us to pull over, we would do that. Why in a crowd do so many people get bold and think that we can do what ever we want even after being told its time to go. I know that on Monday there were over 3 orders/ warning given in the area of Kellog Park before the cops used gas on the crowd. The cops warned us, if you didnt believe them, oh well. I guess In the end, the actions of a few hurt the cause of many and message that some of us are trying to deliver.

I agree with your other detractors—protesting isn't something that requires a permit. The act of protesting may indeed draw uncalled for and violent response, and that in turn should draw called for and insistent litigation. Police action, officials behind police action, unnecessary force and the risk of the lives of those exercising their right to free speech should be seriously litigated. The concept of permitted protest is utterly laughable.

The treatment of convention protestors in the last few years in various cities has sounded more and more like a police state and has been more and more accepted without comment by the mainstream media. They and we should be out there in millions to protect our Consitution. Where are we?

I am a vet and have seen police handle non-aggressive protesters in this fashion only in countries where military rule was in place.

I am no longer proud to live in the US. I shed blood defending people's rights and to uphold the Constitution. I have written letters of condolence to the families of young men who lost their lives in service. After seeing a young woman beaten and sprayed while taking no aggressive action of her own, I feel that the Constitution is now nothing more than lip service to those who have died to defend it.

We have film footage of the individual who broke the window walking right by a cluster of police with a bandana on his face, carrying the long pole he used moments later to break the window. The cops did absolutely nothing to stop him. To say we're suspicious about this situation–and, perhaps, that individual's relationship with the cops–is putting it mildly.

Michelle Gross
Communities United Against Police Brutality
Minneapolis, MN

To say nothing of the nearly 400 deaths that have been caused by Tasers. And, by the way, I'm still trying to get my hearing back after two concussion grenades exploded within inches of my head–and all I was doing was filming police conduct.

You need to be aware that on Day 4, Fletcher pulled the permit at the last minute. That's why people kept on marching. We don't need the permission of a police-state fascist like Fletcher (or his enablers in the Department of Homeland Security) to exercise the First Amendment. If we have to ask, is speech really free?

See my reply above. It's pretty clear police plants/provocateurs were involved in providing justification for the excessive use of force. The police also engaged in lots of openly provocative tactics at every event such as rushing into the crowd at a permitted musical event on the capitol and arresting two people who were simply resting on the lawn, then creating a wall of robocops that split the crowd into two. Yet the attendees showed remarkable restraint in the face of such outrageous conduct. At another event on the capitol lawn, cops were searching anyone whose looks they didn't like until the NLG lawyers forced them to back off.

Throughout the entire week, I saw cops deliberately try to provoke confrontations and protesters resisting the urge. So much for “protecting and serving.”

The difference is this–driving is a privilege. Protesting (aka “redressing your government”) is a right. The cops cannot just decide on a whim that your right to protest no longer exists and you have to leave because they tell you to. Of course, to prove that you have to litigate and by the time you do, your rights are long gone and cannot be regained.

The other thing that needs to be clear is that different groups of cops often give conflicting orders (if such orders are even legal). At the tail end of the 9/4 event, for example, different groups of cops were herding people in different directions. One group on horseback was forcing everyone west, while another group was bombing (smoke bombs and concussion grenades) the area to the west that everyone was trying to run to. How are people supposed to follow jumbled orders over a loud speaker that is far away or different sets of orders coming from all over the place? How are people supposed to leave the area when there is nowhere to go?

Dear Whoever, Please just nuke us all and be done with it. All the hate, violence, deceit and greed is too much.

Woot, what exactly is protestant about “permitted protest?”

Police action like this leave no recourse for peaceful protest. Civil disobedience is out of the question when police violence is allowed. Peaceful demonstrations are never going to make any impact when the police act as goons. What is a citizen supposed to do?
The individual police should be ashamed. Just “Following orders” is what the Nazis did.
The mayors of the 2 cities are wrong in not condemning the actions of their police departments.

As an individual who helped set up security for the RNC convention it was a bit distressing the Sunday before the convention started, to come into the city of St Paul and speak with a Metropolitan Council police officer parked in his vehicle and learn that he did not know who St Paul Police Chief Herrington was.

I live in Minneapolis. I suspect when I was taken from my apartment and frisked some time before the convention, people seeing this thought I was arrested. I was not arrested. I was taken into protective police custody.

When I was taken in handcuffs from my apartment another time, I was taken for a psychiatric examination. Shortly after that I was released with two bus tokens after dark. I walked home. The two bus tokens currently are setting on my kitchen counter.

The police officers in each case acted appropriately.

As a female with three children, two of whom are direct descendants of President Richard Nixon’s family, there is a lot I would like to say publicly. I have started a memoir. That project is resting.

Perhaps, if I am able to finish that memoir I will include that fact that seeing G. Gordan Liddy on television here recently stirred negative emotions.

It caused me to wonder if he, G. Gordan Liddy is receiving government service retirement money.

I am not. Nor did I know the existence of this publication prior to reading it this morning.

Go read Naomi Kleins article ‘10 Steps to Fascism’ that appeared in the UK Guardian last year, go down the list, and just try to find one thing that hasn’t already happened in America.

Then rembember that Rumsfield recently changed the military’s oath so that soldiers now swear alligience to the Commander in Chief and not the constitution.

And that according to the Army times as of Oct. 1 there’s a full brigade of soldiers assigned to the US for “crowd control” purposes who have been equiped and instructed to use the same crowd control techniquest they used in Iraq – a clear violation of Posse Comitatus. (Don’t take my word for it, look it up).

and consider that members of the house of representatives were threatened with MArtial Law if they didn’t pass the bailout bill. 3 weeks ago that would have been an empty threat. but not now.

And then think about the fact that the bailout bill gave the president 8 billion dollars in discretionary funds with no congressional oversight.

while you’re at it, consider that – according to the Justice Department – the whole planet is legally a “battlefield” the the so-called “war on terror”, and ask yourself “if the whole world is a battlefield. doesn’t that include America?

And remember that the patriot act allows the feds to define protest as terrorism and that terrorists can be stripped of their citizenship and held indefinitely without trial.

Think about that – and about the hundred other tiny steps towards fascism this country has taken, and WAKE UP. If you don’t want to be living in a fascist state it’s time to either (1) get out in the streets and stop this shit right NOW. (2) get the hell out of America. Because without a major uprising on the part of average americans demanding our rights, this country is about 3 weeks away from overt fascism. even if they do let Obama win. the same 10 corporations are the biggest donors to both parties. Politicians won’t save us. if we want to stop the coup in progress we have to do it ourselves and do it NOW.

Here’s what I do not understand…

10’s of thousands of protesters met each other and had a nice afternoon espousing their shared values and desire for change. This is what free speech is all about, getting out there and getting together to speak with 1 voice…

BUT… why should it extend to trying to go down to the XCEL to try interfere with others that are trying to meet and pick their candidate. Why isn’t free speech enough, why do protestors think they have the right to try to physically go down and interfere with the RNC convention. Your rights to free speech do not extent to the point of interfering with others political convention, do not extend to the point of interfering with other’s rights.

If you are of the ilk that you should be able to interfere with the others that are trying to meet and choose their own candidate, that the police are your enemies and should NOT get between two groups of people that vehemently disagree, for the safety of all… what EXACTLY do you want instead? It seems to me that many posting here DON”T want police that arm themselves and use force to keep people from hurting each other. The alternative is chaos, be careful what you ask for… it could be like many places in the world where people beat each other and shoot each other with no law to keep things ’sane’.
There is a difference between espousing your own views through free speech, and actually getting people to listen. Your have the right to state your views, you do NOT have the right to force anyone to listen to you. Also you will convince ZERO republican national convention attendees of your rightness of thought, by attempting to lay siege to their own gathering.
The forces for change will make the most difference at the edges of groups, where reasoned logic can convince thoughtful people about the right course of action for the future. Massed attempts at intimidation will only harden the hearts of the radicals on both sides.