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?
BarkinDog – don’t you know that as a good liberal there is no difference between girls and boys? Girls can be just as disruptive in the classroom as boys. And, as a teacher, I never feared breaking up a fight between boys, but the fights between the girls scared the hell out of me. They get this death grip in each others hair and you cannot get them apart. You almost have to hose them down to stop them.
Karen, you need to SEE the video. Her leg flew up because she was being tipped over very quickly backwards. She in no way tipped herself over.
And that is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard – that if the girl was non compliant with the officer, that you condone college rape.
I just gave a cause and effect comparison, of my own brother complying with a police officer. Does that mean I condone rape? What an absurd statement, and a very weird justification of rape.
That is a prime example of false logic.
Correction: this cop is a Richland County sheriif’s deputy, not a member of the Columbia PD.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/10/27/witness-to-spring-valley-high-arrest-i-couldnt-believe-this-was-happening/
Calvin Jackson, one of four black members of the seven-member school board, told the New York Times that the “overwhelming majority” of parents were pleased with the direction of the district, but that he was “outraged” and “angered” by the video.
“We’re going to be asking for the permanent removal of this officer from our schools,” Jackson said.
Columbia’s mayor, Steve Benjamin (D), also issued a statement condemning the officer’s behavior.
“Though this incident involved a Richland County Sheriff’s Deputy and not an officer with the Columbia Police Department, we cannot and will not accept this kind of behavior from any law enforcement officer,” he said. “I firmly believe that we need an independent investigation to get the bottom of this incident and see that justice is done.”
Of course the Sheriff’s Dept should also investigate. What harm does it do to also have outside investigators investigating
And I did not assume she struck the cop. I actually said:
“There is a photo of her fist on him. I have no idea, since I cannot watch the video angle, if her hand was gently resting on him or if she punched him. She is still a girl half his size so not a big threat. But it is also important to note that the photo shows her own leg kicking up against the bottom of the chair, and the officer’s hand was not on the desk at all.”
Since the photo proves that the cop did not touch the desk, did she kick it over herself when her leg flew up, which is visible in the picture? Considering one of my problems is that her desk knocked over, and she could have been hurt, it is very important to me to know who knocked it over – her or the cop. And an investigation will determine that.
There is nothing wrong with amateur sleuthing, as long as it acknowledges that they don’t have all the photos or video that may be available. Whatever the investigation uncovers, it should release all the evidence to the public afterward.
The implication is that Internal Affairs should not be involved if the victim is black. Or that it is wrong if there is any other outcome than a dismissal and/or criminal charges.
This is what mob rule looks like. How would you feel if this standard was ever applied to you?
“It should NOT be an internal affairs investigation. We have all seen what happens to these “internal affairs investigations”. This cop is dangerous, this cop has had other incidents of undue violence and was allowed to remain at the school by the Columbia PD. Outside investigators are warranted.”
OK. Then dismantle ALL Internal Affairs departments and make all investigations unbiased and third party. I have no problem with all investigations being conducted by a neutral third party. Apply the exact same standard to ALL investigations, not just the ones where black people are involved. Otherwise, the message that is being inadvertently sent to criminal black youth is that it’s a free for all. You can do whatever you want and Al Sharpton will support you, and your family can sue for millions. Equal justice for all.
The DOJ is not a neutral third party. It is heavily politicized. And it is being unequally applied.
Karen, the girl did not strike out at the cop. Her arm shot up as her desk was being upended as if to grab onto something to keep from being tipped onto her back. You need to SEE the video before assuming she struck the cop.
Let’s compare how this unfortunate incident unfolded with another:
Years ago, my older brother, as a teenager, walked home from high school with his friend, who realized he’d forgotten his key. So they popped the screen out of the window and started climbing inside. Someone passing by saw them and called the cops. The cops arrived. My brother’s friend did not have his wallet or ID with him. They handcuffed both of them and made them wait on the curb, in the seat of shame, until they could reach the friend’s mother to verify who he was.
Both boys meekly complied. Neither boy punched or hit the cop. None of the parents sued. No one marched. No one said the cop was racist because he didn’t take their word for it. They understood the cop was just doing his job, although of course they did not enjoy it.
If the cop was unable to reach an adult to verify, then both boys would have been taken to the station for it to be sorted out. But, luckily, they reached the boy’s mom.
Cause…effect. They complied and nothing happened to them except their pride.
I do want to ensure that cops are properly trained in how to handle an uncooperative, physically rebellious teenager, or an elderly person with dementia, without hurting them. That’s my main concern, and I hope the investigation uncovers whether this was proper, if if they can improve training.
It should NOT be an internal affairs investigation. We have all seen what happens to these “internal affairs investigations”. This cop is dangerous, this cop has had other incidents of undue violence and was allowed to remain at the school by the Columbia PD. Outside investigators are warranted.
Cause . . . Effect. After Freddie Gray, cops are no longer willing to proactively police. (And, recall, they were told by the DA to proactively police that exact corner where they got Freddie Gray, a corner used by drug traffickers.)
The effect is that murders have skyrocketed over 400% in some areas.
Cause…Effect.
What will be the cause and effect from, once again, jumping to conclusions and engaging in mob rule? Will they burn down another city? Loot it? Kill this cop’s family or content themselves with death threats.
People are going absolutely nuts as a matter of course, and it’s all fanned vigorously by the internet.
Wait for an investigation, get all the facts, and then deal with the conclusions. No politics. No bias. No throwing the race card until you have proof. Calm down. Breathe. Act rationally. If there is a training issue, deal with it. If discipline can be improved at the school, deal with it. If this girl acts like this and refuses to get an education, whose fault will it be when she has a horrible life? Who will she blame, because it very likely will not be herself.
This guy is a thug, but due (again) to status and skin color that label would not be applied here.
Why is the FBI and DOJ investigating what should be an Internal Affairs matter? This seems political. Why is it not investigating the 4 cops murdered in NYC in the past 11 months? Why do they investigate only if the victim is black?
An investigation may indeed find the cop was wrong. It may be a training issue. Who knows yet? But in my opinion, having the FBI and DOJ investigate before an IA has been concluded is racially motivated politics.
Again, what cop will ever be willing to go to a school again to deal with a teenager, even if that teenager is 6’6″ and a gang banger, if he will get investigated by the DOJ, hanged in effigy, called a racist, receive death threats, lose his job, or have any of the other consequences that we’ve seen come out of mob rule?
Let the investigation happen and keep politics out of it.
And questioning the Constitutionality of any new laws passed IS following the law. That is the procedure developed to ensure we do not lose our freedoms, or descend into a dictatorship or banana republic.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/27/sc-deputy-classroom-video/74668562/
FBI called in over S.C. school incident caught on video
USA TODAY NETWORK WLTX-TV, Columbia, S.C. 12:52 p.m. EDT October 27, 2015
COLUMBIA, S.C. — In the wake of the video that surfaced from a South Carolina classroom of a school resource officer forcibly pulling a student out of her chair, the Richland County Sheriff is seeking a federal investigation of the incident.
Sheriff Leon Lott has asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Justice Department to conduct the investigation of Monday’s incident at Spring Valley High School.
philat:
“It’s pretty hilarious how many of the same people who are squawking about how this girl needs to “comply with the law” routinely advocate breaking the law, overthrowing the government and so on.”
Who’s talking about breaking the law or overthrowing the government? The 2nd Amendment talk is about the founders deliberately writing the right to bear arms into our Constitution because they just went to a lot of trouble to throw out a tyrant. They saw the Scotts disarmed after Culloden. They never wanted to be helpless again, and it’s good for government to respect its citizens.
The ability to fight an evil tyrant does not equate to “let’s just overthrow the government” next Sunday after the football game. If some unforeseen unfortunate series of events turned the US into the equivalent of Saudi Arabia, would you want to be able to resist the government? Who knows what could happen in a 1,000 years. A large asteroid could hit and we could all be living in dystopia, or we could be living “Demolition Man” where Taco Bell won the franchise wars. A really interesting question that dystopian novelists use to write their time line is “what series of events would have to happen to transform the US of today into the equivalent of Saudi Arabia in, let’s say, 326 years?” Or there is Fahrenheit 451, which is beginning to have some eerie similarities.
It is a useless argument to claim that if you support your Constitutionally protected right to bear arms, you must be lawless, or you must have any particular opinion about this incident. That makes no sense.
The constitutional “rule of law” means that no human being, including police officers, are above the U.S. Constitution and it’s subordinate local, state and federal statutes.
It’s curious that those promoting a Cold War style police state don’t follow authority themselves – they only follow laws that they agree with – putting themselves above the supreme law of the land.
“I did find it almost comical how the mayor jumped all over this situation and then called for an Independent Investigation to make sure justice is served. Seems he is convinced only one outcome will meet his satisfaction. But he is a mayor so I don’t see how this matters when the sheriff is actually the person in charge.”
Still so hard for D.S. to admit when excessive use of force occurs by law enforcement. hahahaha this place is great. The definition of liberty for here cannot be found in a dictionary, but more like a mystical type of philosophy.
It’s pretty hilarious how many of the same people who are squawking about how this girl needs to “comply with the law” routinely advocate breaking the law, overthrowing the government and so on.
A very typical libertarian viewpoint: I support the things I like and oppose everything else.
The opinions of the other student witnesses are useful, but so is their prejudice. Are these anti-cop students who all feel just as entitled as the girl herself? Did they think she was justified in her behavior? From their point of view, could they see what she was doing?
The account of the arrest is obviously disturbing. We want to make sure our police are properly trained on how to handle the elderly, rebellious teenagers, people with asthma, the mentally ill. . . We also need to be very careful to get all the facts and a full investigation. What can we learn from this incident?