Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ItsjustMe

(11,166 posts)
Tue Jan 31, 2023, 12:16 PM Jan 2023

Police pepper-spraying of 7-year-old boy at BLM protest in Seattle was 'lawful and proper,' report f

Police pepper-spraying of 7-year-old boy at BLM protest in Seattle was ‘lawful and proper,’ report finds


A high-profile incident in which a Seattle Police officer doused a 7-year-old boy with pepper spray at a Black Lives Matter protest was “lawful and proper,” the results of a police probe released Friday said.

A compilation video showing the May 30 protest scene and a medic pouring milk over the crying child’s face was released by the Seattle Police Department’s Office of Police Accountability as the civilian-run group braced for backlash.

“OPA understands that this decision will be unpalatable to some and perhaps to many. This is understandable. In some respects, it is unpalatable to OPA,” the report said.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Police pepper-spraying of 7-year-old boy at BLM protest in Seattle was 'lawful and proper,' report f (Original Post) ItsjustMe Jan 2023 OP
Define "lawful and proper" what is the purpose of using pepper spray - to punish? walkingman Jan 2023 #1
But it wasn't. Igel Jan 2023 #3
explain this Snoopy 7 Feb 2023 #5
The parents had brought their children to join others of their family, Hortensis Feb 2023 #6
"We investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong." SledDriver Jan 2023 #2
Yep. (n/t) OldBaldy1701E Feb 2023 #4

Igel

(35,191 posts)
3. But it wasn't.
Tue Jan 31, 2023, 10:23 PM
Jan 2023

The spray was aimed at a woman who, rather than take the spray herself for her improper actions, ducked so that somebody else took the fall:

The video indicated that NE#1’s burst of pepper spray at Subject #1 was targeted directly towards her while she
actively pushed WO#3 and appeared to attempt to breach the line. In that respect, it was an appropriate usage of
this less-lethal tool. Notably, this was not a case in which NE#1 misted pepper spray across an entire crowd or
indiscriminately sprayed a group of people. If he had done so, he would have borne responsibility for innocent
bystanders that were affected and OPA would have found his actions contrary to policy. Here, however, NE#1 used a
directed application purposed to eliminate unlawful behavior. This was consistent not just with the overall use of
force policy, but also with the requirements of SPD Policy 8.300-POL-5, which specifically governs the use of pepper
spray. ...

... On one hand, the Child suffered a
clear wrong when he was affected with the pepper spray utilized by NE#1. On the other hand, NE#1 used
appropriate force to prevent Subject #1 from breaching the line and could not have known that Subject #1 was
going to duck and that the Father was going to bring himself and the Child directly behind her, putting them in the
immediate vicinity of the disturbance. This is not said to blame the Father, as OPA does not believe that any parent
would knowingly place their child in harm’s way. These are simply incontrovertible facts.
As discussed more fully above, when applying the policy in place on May 30 to the facts of this case, OPA cannot
reach any conclusion other than that the force used by NE#1 was lawful and proper. Moreover, at the time of this
incident, there was no section of the policy that caused directed pepper spraying to be improper simply because it
inadvertently affected another individual in the immediate vicinity. Accordingly, that this occurred here cannot
constitute a policy violation. Since this case, however, the Seattle City Council passed Ordinance 126102, which now
creates a legal cause of action for individuals affected by pepper spray during a demonstration. While this does not
undo the harm suffered by the Child, it may deter similar incidents from occurring in the future and, at the very
least, will provide a legal and monetary remedy.
https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OPA/ClosedCaseSummaries/2020OPA-0322ccs09-04-20.pdf

Snoopy 7

(521 posts)
5. explain this
Wed Feb 1, 2023, 09:58 AM
Feb 2023

"Following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25, a group of Seattle protesters, starting in the Chinatown–International District’s Hing Hay Park, marches through downtown. Ultimately, they break windows and throw fireworks. Seattle Police Department (SPD) officers, clad in riot gear, deploy pepper spray, throw flash bangs, and—in an incident still being investigated by Office of Police Accountability (OPA)—appear to pin a protester to the ground and punch them."
Many of the trouble makers were later found to be instigators not part of the protesters.
e.g.: https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/edmonds-washington-man-sentenced-prison-molotov-cocktail-attacks-may-30-2020-protest

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
6. The parents had brought their children to join others of their family,
Wed Feb 1, 2023, 11:34 AM
Feb 2023

including their pastor grandfather, who also brought their children to be part of this historic effort for social justice. Such a shame that this happened. The father had to pause to control his emotions as he spoke of feeling that he had failed as a father to protect his son, but absolutely not because, as he's been accused of, irresponsibly taking his children to this demonstration.

The parents have brought suit in federal court and are disappointed by the OPA's conclusion.

The then-current ordinance had left peaceful demonstrators who were injured inadvertently like this, a very possible occurrence, without civil recourse to seek damages under local law, and I'm very glad that they've now fixed that. We planned at one time to move to Seattle, and I've always wished we had.

From the OPA document: "At the time of this incident, there was no section of the policy that caused directed pepper spraying to be improper simply because it inadvertently affected another individual in the immediate vicinity. Accordingly, that this occurred here cannot constitute a policy violation.

Since this case, however, the Seattle City Council passed Ordinance 126102, which now creates a legal cause of action for individuals affected by pepper spray during a demonstration. While this does not undo the harm suffered by the Child, it may deter similar incidents from occurring in the future and, at the very least, will provide a legal and monetary remedy."
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Police pepper-spraying of...