Report: Oakland Police Used 'Overwhelming Military-Type Response' Against Occupiers
Court ordered monitors 'thoroughly dismayed by what we observed' at Oakland Police Department
Oakland police used "an overwhelming military-type response" to disperse Occupy Oakland demonstrators and fired at a former Marine and Iraq war veteran who was critically injured in the clashes in October, according to a court ordered report released Monday.
The Oakland Police Department has been under investigation by third party monitors since 2003 after reported misconduct and repeated use of unlawful force. The department came under renewed scrutiny during last year's Occupy Oakland protests that brought many new charges of police brutality; Oakland police received more than 1,000 misconduct complaints during the OWS protests.
In the most televised case, OWS protester and former US marine Scott Olsen was shot in the head with what is now reported to be a 'beanbag round', causing severe brain damage.
This latest court ordered report now concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening.
"We have viewed many official and unofficial video clips of the Occupy Oakland-related incidents," the report said. "These recordings lead us to ask additional questions as the level of force that was used by OPD officers, and whether that use of force was in compliance with the Department's use of force policies."
The third-party report author Robert Warshaw wrote that he was 'thoroughly dismayed' by many actions taken by the Oakland Police Department in response to the Occupy protests.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight, told Reuters. "We must seriously explore the next step."
* * *
Occupy Oakland video: Riot police fire tear gas, flash grenades, bean bags, Scott Olsen injured:
* * *
Reuters: Report criticizes Oakland police handling of Occupy protests
Oakland's police practices came under intense scrutiny last year when former Marine Scott Olsen was critically injured during a demonstration in October. Protesters said he was hit in the head by a tear gas canister.
The report concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening. An Oakland Police Department SWAT team member fired a beanbag round at Olsen, striking him in the head, according to the report. [...]
The beanbag rounds fired that night leave a green residue, which was found on the hat Olsen was wearing that night, later retrieved by police, according to the report.
Olsen's case reinvigorated the Occupy movement against economic inequality, and the confrontations with police in subsequent protests turned Oakland into a focal point for the movement as demonstrators rallied against what they described as police brutality.
The Oakland Police Department has been subject to court-ordered external monitoring and review since the 2003 settlement of what was known as the Riders case, in which four officers were accused of planting evidence, fabricating police reports and using unlawful force, according to the Oakland police.
Monday's report was the latest in a series designed to monitor and enforce compliance with the court-ordered reforms, known as the Negotiated Settlement Agreement.
* * *
San Francisco Chronicle: Oakland police monitor questions response to Occupy
The federal court monitor tracking reforms in the Oakland police force said Monday that the effort had met "outright stagnation," and raised questions about officers' use of beanbag shotguns and other weapons during what he called a "military-type" response to Occupy demonstrations.
The court-ordered reforms, many of them focused on how the department polices its own officers, haven't progressed in six months and have gone backward in the past year, said a report by the monitor, Robert Warshaw.
Critics of the department said the findings brought Oakland's police force closer to a federal takeover.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," said John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight. "We must seriously explore the next step."
# # #
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Oakland police used "an overwhelming military-type response" to disperse Occupy Oakland demonstrators and fired at a former Marine and Iraq war veteran who was critically injured in the clashes in October, according to a court ordered report released Monday.
The Oakland Police Department has been under investigation by third party monitors since 2003 after reported misconduct and repeated use of unlawful force. The department came under renewed scrutiny during last year's Occupy Oakland protests that brought many new charges of police brutality; Oakland police received more than 1,000 misconduct complaints during the OWS protests.
In the most televised case, OWS protester and former US marine Scott Olsen was shot in the head with what is now reported to be a 'beanbag round', causing severe brain damage.
This latest court ordered report now concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening.
"We have viewed many official and unofficial video clips of the Occupy Oakland-related incidents," the report said. "These recordings lead us to ask additional questions as the level of force that was used by OPD officers, and whether that use of force was in compliance with the Department's use of force policies."
The third-party report author Robert Warshaw wrote that he was 'thoroughly dismayed' by many actions taken by the Oakland Police Department in response to the Occupy protests.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight, told Reuters. "We must seriously explore the next step."
* * *
Occupy Oakland video: Riot police fire tear gas, flash grenades, bean bags, Scott Olsen injured:
* * *
Reuters: Report criticizes Oakland police handling of Occupy protests
Oakland's police practices came under intense scrutiny last year when former Marine Scott Olsen was critically injured during a demonstration in October. Protesters said he was hit in the head by a tear gas canister.
The report concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening. An Oakland Police Department SWAT team member fired a beanbag round at Olsen, striking him in the head, according to the report. [...]
The beanbag rounds fired that night leave a green residue, which was found on the hat Olsen was wearing that night, later retrieved by police, according to the report.
Olsen's case reinvigorated the Occupy movement against economic inequality, and the confrontations with police in subsequent protests turned Oakland into a focal point for the movement as demonstrators rallied against what they described as police brutality.
The Oakland Police Department has been subject to court-ordered external monitoring and review since the 2003 settlement of what was known as the Riders case, in which four officers were accused of planting evidence, fabricating police reports and using unlawful force, according to the Oakland police.
Monday's report was the latest in a series designed to monitor and enforce compliance with the court-ordered reforms, known as the Negotiated Settlement Agreement.
* * *
San Francisco Chronicle: Oakland police monitor questions response to Occupy
The federal court monitor tracking reforms in the Oakland police force said Monday that the effort had met "outright stagnation," and raised questions about officers' use of beanbag shotguns and other weapons during what he called a "military-type" response to Occupy demonstrations.
The court-ordered reforms, many of them focused on how the department polices its own officers, haven't progressed in six months and have gone backward in the past year, said a report by the monitor, Robert Warshaw.
Critics of the department said the findings brought Oakland's police force closer to a federal takeover.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," said John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight. "We must seriously explore the next step."
# # #
Oakland police used "an overwhelming military-type response" to disperse Occupy Oakland demonstrators and fired at a former Marine and Iraq war veteran who was critically injured in the clashes in October, according to a court ordered report released Monday.
The Oakland Police Department has been under investigation by third party monitors since 2003 after reported misconduct and repeated use of unlawful force. The department came under renewed scrutiny during last year's Occupy Oakland protests that brought many new charges of police brutality; Oakland police received more than 1,000 misconduct complaints during the OWS protests.
In the most televised case, OWS protester and former US marine Scott Olsen was shot in the head with what is now reported to be a 'beanbag round', causing severe brain damage.
This latest court ordered report now concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening.
"We have viewed many official and unofficial video clips of the Occupy Oakland-related incidents," the report said. "These recordings lead us to ask additional questions as the level of force that was used by OPD officers, and whether that use of force was in compliance with the Department's use of force policies."
The third-party report author Robert Warshaw wrote that he was 'thoroughly dismayed' by many actions taken by the Oakland Police Department in response to the Occupy protests.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight, told Reuters. "We must seriously explore the next step."
* * *
Occupy Oakland video: Riot police fire tear gas, flash grenades, bean bags, Scott Olsen injured:
* * *
Reuters: Report criticizes Oakland police handling of Occupy protests
Oakland's police practices came under intense scrutiny last year when former Marine Scott Olsen was critically injured during a demonstration in October. Protesters said he was hit in the head by a tear gas canister.
The report concludes, for the first time from an official source, that police did fire at and hit Olsen that evening. An Oakland Police Department SWAT team member fired a beanbag round at Olsen, striking him in the head, according to the report. [...]
The beanbag rounds fired that night leave a green residue, which was found on the hat Olsen was wearing that night, later retrieved by police, according to the report.
Olsen's case reinvigorated the Occupy movement against economic inequality, and the confrontations with police in subsequent protests turned Oakland into a focal point for the movement as demonstrators rallied against what they described as police brutality.
The Oakland Police Department has been subject to court-ordered external monitoring and review since the 2003 settlement of what was known as the Riders case, in which four officers were accused of planting evidence, fabricating police reports and using unlawful force, according to the Oakland police.
Monday's report was the latest in a series designed to monitor and enforce compliance with the court-ordered reforms, known as the Negotiated Settlement Agreement.
* * *
San Francisco Chronicle: Oakland police monitor questions response to Occupy
The federal court monitor tracking reforms in the Oakland police force said Monday that the effort had met "outright stagnation," and raised questions about officers' use of beanbag shotguns and other weapons during what he called a "military-type" response to Occupy demonstrations.
The court-ordered reforms, many of them focused on how the department polices its own officers, haven't progressed in six months and have gone backward in the past year, said a report by the monitor, Robert Warshaw.
Critics of the department said the findings brought Oakland's police force closer to a federal takeover.
"Stagnation is troubling. After nine years, more progress should be made," said John Burris, one of two attorneys who brought a civil suit a decade ago that led to court oversight. "We must seriously explore the next step."
# # #