As many of you may be aware from my prior posts, I am not one to give definite yes or no opinions on particular incidents. This one is no different. I do not condone the actions of so called “rogue cops.†Police brutality should be treated as the criminal act that it is. However, I also recognize that there usually are two sides of a story. It also is human nature to put one’s own argument in the best light when playing in the realm of public opinion.
Personally, I think there were a few things missing from the initial account of this incident. Some came to light later in the thread. The initial post did not mention a riot, other than to say the police involved in the encounter were wearing riot gear, while a later post mentions the “Mardi Gras riots.†Was there some form of civil disturbance going on? That tends to change the equation from a police officer’s point of view, in terms of the compliance that they expect when they tell people to move up the street, and in terms of the time that they have to do things like stopping what they are doing and engaging in conversation with people who want their badge numbers.
The initial account of the incident does mention that the people involved were participating in a Mardi Gras celebration, but it is not until later in the post that there is mention that the person was offered a plea bargain that included 1 year in an alcohol treatment program. Now, while I recognize that police and/or DA’s can pile on charges, I see no mention in the post as to exactly how much alcohol the person involved in this incident may have consumed, if any. Having worked 6 Mardi Gras seasons in New Orleans, I would say that individual and crowd attitude can run from “just having some rowdy fun,†slow compliance, .10 drunks, to full blown, obnoxious, physically combative, .30+ drunks, and education, wealth and social status have nothing to do with it. They may look great in court a few days later, but it doesn’t change their attitude, intoxicated state and actions the night of the incident.
Unaware that the police were clearing streets? When you see a bunch of cops in a line dressed in riot gear? I dunno, maybe the police weren’t displayed in sufficient array to give the correct impression, or maybe the people involved were too intoxicated to know, or maybe they just didn’t care. Again, I have to fall back on my Mardi Gras experience and say that it really runs the gamut here. However, I have been amazed at the number of people who will attempt to cross (i.e. run over) or circumvent barricades and real live police officers. This occurs with people on foot and in vehicles. That doesn’t mean that Mitch and Sandy necessarily fell into this category.
Grand jury review. The argument is that the fact that the grand jury failed to indict means that the police were wrong. This does not follow. Initially, I must admit that I do not know the particulars of Texas law, but I suspect that, like many states, grand juries only review potential felony offenses, not city misdemeanor offenses. Assuming that this is correct, this only means that the grand jury did not find probable cause to indict for the felony charge. It does not mean that there was not probable cause to arrest for a crime. Second, the police, in their anger, may have made a tactical error and upcharged the guy on a felony charge when a misdemeanor disturbing the peace or public intoxication charge could have been brought or sustained. Note that I am not saying that the police or the person involved in the incident were right or wrong, just pointing out some considerations that would be relevant to the inquiry. I also would be interested in knowing why Mitch was charged with a felony and Sandy was only charged with a misdemeanor.
As to a potential civil settlement, and the amount, that doesn’t mean much. Litigants who consider settling are usually considering the cost of defense and the risk of a runaway jury.
I’m not saying that any of the people involved here were right or wrong, but I do think that there are some facts that we don’t know, that would have a bearing on the incident. I would need to know a lot more before making a decision on this one.
Flame suit on.