The video below has caused a public outcry after a South Carolina school resource officer identified as Richland County Sheriff’s Department Senior Deputy Ben Fields is shown tossing a female high school student to the floor and dragging her from a classroom after she refused to get up and leave with him. Fields has been placed on paid administrative leave.
Fields, shown right from a Twitter photo, was reportedly called in because the student would not get off her cellphone or leave the class as instructed. The 15-second video shows Fields asking the student “Are You Coming With Me or am I Going to Make You? Come on. I’m going to get you up.” What follows is the scuffle where the student ends up on the floor and being pulled by Fields. Fields is heard saying “I’ll put you in jail next.”
The site Heavy has reported that Fields in the subject of a lawsuit alleging violations of the civil rights of a student at Spring Valley High School. The student, Ashton James Reese, was expelled in 2013 from the high school for “unlawful assembly of gang activity and assault and battery” and was also accused of participating in a “gang related” fight in a Walmart parking lot near the school. In the lawsuit, he is accused of “recklessly target[ing] African-American students with allegations of gang membership and criminal gang activity.”
The Columbia mayor has denounced Fields and said “We cannot and will not accept this kind of behavior from any law enforcement officer and I firmly believe that we need an independent investigation to get to the bottom of this incident and see that justice is done.”
Given that this was all about cellphone use, is there any justification for this level of force in your view?
Some have asked for additional commentary and here is an update on this.
With regard to whether or not the arrest of this girl which led to the incident. The probable cause has not met with a trier of fact to determine if this was applicable. (as far as I know). This could go either way depending on that state’s criminal procedures and case law. However for me I don’t see this student’s alleged defiance leading to the SRO being called as necessitating criminal charges.
One reason is the in loco parentis relationship between the student and the school. Causing a classroom disruption here is analogous to causing a disruption in a home and that is not in my view rises to the level of criminality. The disorderly conduct charge can be problematic if one of the members is a member of that assembly so disrupted. But some states have criminal statutes relating to disrupting a school event, which might be more applicable. But I haven’t the time right now to research this with the locality in question. If the student had made common criminal behavior, based upon her age, such as assaultive behavior or such that would be a separate issue. This has not been alleged to be charged against her. For these reasons I don’t agree that disruptive behavior such as this is criminal, but that discussion is a matter of general policy and might not be applicable to whether this deputy had PC to arrest.
Next comes the issue of whether the student punched the SRO as evidenced from the video. What I see when the SRO initiates physical contact with the student is that he first grasps her left arm in an effort to extract her from the table. She then does not come out as a result of this. Whether or not she held herself fast or she simply became stuck due to the relatively small seating position I cannot determine this to any certainty. I will note that the extraction was blocked in substantial part due to the relative light weight of the table/chair, that is that it could be lifted easy and did not provide a sufficient basis to easily remove her from her seated position. This most likely caused the difficulty in getting her out.
When he pulled backward (that is from her physical position) the chair began to go backward. The SRO was still holding at that time holding on to her. It is highly probable the student (at the very least subconsciously) believed that she was about to be tipped over backward and reacted by trying to grab or push in such a way to prevent her from injury. I did not see any evidence that she punched him with the intent to assault him. I evidence this by him showing no reaction to being struck in a manner consistent with an assault.
The student’s reaction to being tipped over backward and subsequently either grabbing or pushing away or even a light striking of from the deputy is insufficient to establish probable cause for either assault or resisting arrest. The reason for this is if the student can establish by a preponderance of evidence that her actions were caused by a need to protect herself from injury stemming form falling over backward, it would lack mens rea to assault the officer or resist arrest because it would be closer to a natural reaction to prevent harm to herself and not the officer.
It should also be noted that in moving a person around, even outside the realm of effecting an arrest, that any movement of a substantial nature is going to cause this person to move in a way to maintain balance, prevent a fall, or protect from injury. In fact, physiological studies have shown strong evidence that some stimuli can cause a reaction in the nervous system to signal a countermeasure before the signal can reach the conscious mind for a decision on how to react to the stimulus. Pain often can result in this neural override. In that situation there is clearly no mens rea due to the biological nature of the action.
It is an expected result that tossing a person around during an arrest that certain actions of the person are going to be physical reaction in nature and those individual actions may not be used as evidence of resisting arrest, though the totality of all the applicable intentional actions may.
As an aside we can see a form of this when looking at head injury patients. It is not uncommon in a Law Enforcement setting to encounter persons with serious head trauma. Sometimes head injury patients will become combative as a result of their injury. An assault committed by a person in this state cannot be criminally prosecuted due to the lack of mens rea. If the student here reacted to protect herself from injury due to falling over backward it also would not be admissible.
Now one has to look at the situation as to whether the use of force was reasonable. Someone mentioned a force continuum. If we look at what was presumed (just before the video) and what transpired during recording we go through the following levels: (emphasis: “reasonably used to overcome resistance as the operative)
1) Presence (SRO arrives)
2) SRO orders student to vacate seat
3) SRO uses mild physical “escort holds” to remove student
4) SRO uses pain compliance (not seen but would have been inappropriate) or higher level of force used to effect arrest not constituting higher levels of force.
5) [not applicable but used for illustration] strikes, kicks, takedowns, etc…
The question is whether or not level 4 is applicable and, the separate issue of whether the situation necessitated level 4.
I believe nobody would dispute the use of 1 and 2. In my view the level of force needed to bring this to a conclusion would be taking the cell phone and mildly trying to get her out of the seat. If she wouldn’t have done this we then have to differentiate between whether this constituted a violation of school rules or a criminal matter.
If this was held to be a violation of school rules only the level of forced used by the officer was completely inappropriate. A better solution in this condition would be to perhaps to slowly pull her table out of the classroom and into the hall. (the floor was the type this could happen) then if she did not voluntarily get out bring the principal or who is responsible for discipline to address her. This allows the class to continue and puts the onus upon her to correct this behavior, then go from there.
If this is to be a criminal arrest (which I personally don’t agree with but since this is a matter of policy disagreement we will say it is for the purpose here) is the level of force applicable to the type of defendant.
Had this exact arrest scenario took place in a bar with a drunken 30 year old fully able bodied man who refused to get out of his seat to be arrested on a warrant and refused repeatedly to comply and actively prevented his removal it would be a different situation than a 17 year old girl in school. In that situation a pain compliance such as pressing the nerve plexus at on his left bicep or pressing a thumb downward behind his collar bone to get him out didn’t work then the action of the SRO in this situation would be reasonable and appropriate. Doing the same actions on an elderly 90 year old in the same situation would not be a proper use of force given who the suspect is. Nor if a Taser was indicated for a particular situation might be appropriate on a grassy lawn, it might not be indicated if the setting was atop a steep embankment where the suspect could fall and roll down the hill to be injured on rocks along the way. This is precisely what we have with regard to level of force and the school setting here.
As for whether this is a race issue. Just because the SRO is white and the girl is black it is not always indicative of a racial attack. Though some will introduce the specter of racial disharmony alleged between the police and blacks in general, that does not automatically mean that in every individual situation it is applicable. I have seen no convincing evidence that in this incident race played a factor. In the deputy’s defense, news reports are that he has been dating a black woman “for some time”.
I also do not see this being a situation under the purview of the DOJ or the FBI. This is a minor situation that can be resolved in the initial investigation by some local authority. If every questionable use of force at this level raised to a level necessitating DOJ involvement the DOJ would be completely flooded by cases such as this. Not to say that assaults by police are manifest everywhere but use of force review boards are a routine part of the police profession.
There is credible evidence to suggest that this matter being taken up so quickly by the DOJ has the taint of politics. I am convinced that the level of outrage and coverage spurred the DOJ officials to make statements about this that they were involving themselves was opportunistic an politically motivated. There was no evidence to suggest that in the immediate time that the video went viral that the local officials were skirting their duty to investigate the matter. The DOJ had no concrete facts at the time to believe that a miscarriage of justice had occurred and in fact in any other low news coverage situation where the public ire is not summoned the FBI and DOJ will wait at least to some point in the local investigation has reached before they involve themselves or at least decide whether or not to get involved. Plus, there is no evidence from just the video tape that is sufficiently proved to conclude with sufficiency to make an announcement that federal law had been broken. The level of harm alleged by a government actor must be according to federal case law “shocking to the conscious” to merit a violation of a civil rights statute. While this case certainly is shocking to see, I don’t believe that even if the deputy’s arrest force was so egregious that it necessitates a violation of federal statute.
As I have said before, the prosecution of a person, or the threat of a prosecution can be a form of punishment in of itself used against persons, often by the federal government, where convictions are not likely to occur. Plus politicians are known for using these types of tactics to bear down upon individuals for political gain, especially when armed with a prosecution arm for which their office has sway. It also is a means of pandering to public outrage for their own political benefit, even it if is not necessarily in the need of justice. For this, I believe the DOJ’s announcements are untimely and inappropriate especially in light of this being truly a local matter.
As for the 48 hours between this and termination. Whether or not this was politically motivated I am a bit surprised at how fast the deputy was fired. I have seen terminations take months to occur when the assault alleged by an officer was far more egregious than this incident. I do believe the department felt rushed to wrap up this investigation. I will say that there is not much really to investigate however as it is not really a complex case. But it seems there was an inordinate amount of resource placed in to get this matter resolved. Whether it simply just speeded up the process or at worse tainted the deputy’s due process rights I have no way of knowing this at the present time, though I would have pause to be so conclusive that this deputy’s employment and due process rights were correctly maintained. It also is not to say that something else came out during the investigation that was aggravating. We have to remember that all employees, including those currently viewed as being pariahs, have a right to due process and a fair hearing.
If the department rushed this case through to bow to political pressure it would be a miscarriage of justice even if in the end the deputy would be held to have been properly terminated. If the department violated its employment or applicable law in terminating him they will have just got themselves wrapped up on an expensive lawsuit and a possible rehire situation where if they had just waited and not been so procedurally hasty they might have gotten the same result, his firing. But often politicians and political department managers don’t care how much the county has to pay out in the end if their goals are met in the short term.
I doubt this will be the end of the matter for the county or this deputy.
On another note, this entire upheaval could have been easily prevented by not engaging in as I said before “stupid stuff.” When officers behave this way over minor issues it can blow completely up in their face and lead to a mushroom cloud of controversy, all for nothing and over something stupid such as a misbehaving school girl. Had the did these same actions against an armed robber, nobody would have cared and nothing would have happened to him. But because he did this stupid act over nothing millions involved themselves at least with interest. It always seems to happen with the stupid stuff but you can never tell this to some people.
Darren – according to the attorney representing her pro bono you can charge a student with disturbing a school. Now, this is not something I agree with and the attorney is going to try to get students taken off the list of person chargeable in the next legislature. None the less, she and another student have been charged.
Now I stated long ago that the teacher lost control of the classroom when he called the administration and the administration lost control when they called in the resource officer. And then it all went to hell.
I didn’t know that Philly, this poor girl has been so demonized. She loses her mother gets put in foster care and then is assaulted by a cop at her new school. She WAS injured apparently, yesterday the reports were that she was uninjured.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/black-teen-attacked-by-south-carolina-cop-has-a-cast-on-her-arm-and-neck-and-back-injuries/
Black teen attacked by school cop has multiple injuries — and is an orphan who recently lost her mother
An influential South Carolina Democrat plans to represent a teenage girl thrown to the ground by a school resource officer — and he intends to change a state law that allows police to arrest students for being disruptive in class.
State Rep. Todd Rutherford (D-Columbia) told WLTX-TV the 16-year-old girl suffered arm, neck and back injuries when Fields grabbed her by the throat and threw her to the ground after the teen refused to hand over her cell phone to a teacher.
“He weighs about 300 pounds,” Rutherford said. “She is a student who is 16 years old, who now has a cast on her arm, a band aid on her neck, and neck and back problems. There’s something wrong here.”
http://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article41665926.html
“Fields was bound to get overly aggressive with someone else because he feels no one can touch him, a Fort Jackson nurse — who sued and lost an excessive-force lawsuit against Fields — told The State newspaper Tuesday.
“I felt like he was a ticking time bomb,” Tashiana Rodgers said of the 34-year-old Richland County school resource officer who was filmed flipping a disruptive Spring Valley High School student out of her classroom chair and pushing her out of the room.
“I was not surprised,” Rodgers said of the now-viral videos.
The mother of a Spring Valley student expelled after a 2013 investigation by Fields had a similar response to the images. “Somebody finally got him on tape,” was Samantha Taylor’s first thought.”
To those of you sincerely wondering what the officer was “supposed to do”, the answer is community policing. The beat cop who k owns the neighbors and they know him/her. By name.
If this officer is supposed to be embedded in this school, he would know that this girl’s mother recently died and that she had gone into foster care and maybe was having a rough time.
The ask them, tell them, make them model might apply to new situations with unknown subjects, but if this is his regular assignment then yes, it could have been handled very differently.
The first one.
Wow, the Democracy Now video tells the tale of this bad deputy. Good thing he’s been fired before he killed someone.
https://youtu.be/SIhy8cs_cPU
https://youtu.be/5ugSohft08M
https://youtu.be/Qtslb0kY6qg
http://jonathanturley.org/2015/10/28/msnbc-host-objects-to-description-of-paul-ryan-as-hard-worker/#comment-1503154
“Hall – none of your solutions are viable. It is clear you have never been in a classroom except as a student,”
And there you have it: A typical response, when one tries to propose alternatives.
It’s pointless to engage. It’s a waste of time and energy.
They know it all. They’re folks with all the answers.
anon – as a seasoned teacher I hopefully wouldn’t have gotten into a situation where I had to call the administration into my classroom to begin with. However, once admin wasn’t able to get her out of the chair (and he has a lot more power in the school than me) and he ramps up to the school resource officer, there are limited solutions left. Actually Inga had a great solution that some schools use. A “hit team” of 4 strong male teachers arrive in the classroom and take the student out (with or without the desk). Still, the student is in charge of their own fate.
Personally, I have never liked using the resource officer to handle issues like this. Breaking up fights, dispersing gangs, all that is great.
She’s a kid with behavioral issues. It isn’t rocket science. And it wasn’t a problem that required a response by law enforcement.
Think of the proverb: If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
She was physically removed from her chair after refusing multiple verbal orders to leave the classroom. The Sheriff has a problem with her being thrown across the floor. However, that throwing did not take place until after the deputy was punched (one or more times). The Monday Morning Quarterbacks might not like it, but any seasoned veteran of law enforcement would see this as treating her kindly. You don’t get to punch cops. Period!
Annie, Does one punch vs. multiple punches really matter? You have yet to acknowledge that she punched the deputy. -No wonder you want to run away.
Was the deputy fully within his authority and training to physically remove the student from her chair?
Jack,
Again, we have all seen that video and the other two videos. She did not throw multiple punches at this deputy. Perhaps you need glasses? Now I’m done responding to you, you are obviously not a good observer and arguing with you based on your faulty observation skills is a waste of time.
“You unequivocally stating she threw multiple punches is based on your opinion as a commenter. ”
Not based on my opinion as a commenter, but based on my observation of the video. I see her arm swing at the officer 3 times. Two of those punches appear to have landed. The Sheriff states that she punched the deputy.
Here’s the video: https://youtu.be/ECnkuJ43oTo
And Jack, if you truly are an LEO and say you saw her punching him multiple times, it should be quite concerning to the citizens of the city in which you are employed. Cops need to be observers and react to reasoned observations.
Jack, I called for an investigation and I also was in favor of the DOJ and FBI investigating as well. My opinion as a commenter didn’t affect their investigations. You unequivocally stating she threw multiple punches is based on your opinion as a commenter. We all have our opinions, some opinions are expressed through the alimentary canal though.
No one saw multiple punches being thrown Jack. Not Darren, not any of us here who watched the videos, three of them, multiple times. I can only surmise you are hallucinating.
Annie, If you can’t see multiple punches being thrown by the student, I’ll gladly call you an idiot. 🙂
In addition, to now want to wait for “the two other investigations” when you clearly made up your mind based on the initial low-quality video is more than just a little hypocritical.
Jack, go argue with the Sheriff that fired him. It was he, as well as my brother, who spoke to the fact that this deputy didn’t follow his training. Jack I think you are losing this argument.