Originally Posted by Savannah
I answered every one of your alleged supporting contentions in my various responses on the thread. I suggest you re-read them if you don't think that I have.
I understand you don't trust the police's claims. You answered the student's claim by saying you "don't care what she said", which doesn't really answer it. I can't see where you answered my third/fourth points. And we obviously disagree on the video. Sorry if I missed something, that's certainly possible.
The simple fact of the matter is that it is rather evident even from the vid that the cops were not surrounded in the sense that they could not leave if they so desired, despite what the student said.
I addressed this though. The 8:35 mark of the video doesn't show that the police aren't surrounded, because you can't see them in that shot. Then when it pans back to them, you can see the students sitting across the path with linked arms who weren't visible in the 8:35 shot.
Furthermore, the pepper spraying occurs several minutes after the 8:35 mark, so even if they weren't surrounded at that point (I obviously think they were), that would not do anything to prove that they weren't surrounded at the time they used pepper spray.
It is also readily apparent that the cops were not in any danger whatever from the students. They were not being threatened and there had been no physical, violent actions on the part of the students. The party atmosphere is clearly appreciated by watching the video. This is not a group of rough people in any sense. They are college students for the most part and hardly a threat to the cops.
I would agree if I didn't think they were surrounded, but if they're surrounded then they have to get through them somehow if they're going to leave.
The cops responsibility is to prove that the force used was consistent with the circumstances with which they were confronted.
I don't think that is accurate as a general statement. Usually their testimony is good enough unless there is sufficient evidence contradicting it. When their testimony is also corroborated by the victims of the force and AFAIK
no one who was actually there disputes it, then that should be well more than enough. If the victims in addition to other people at the scene were actually contesting the police's claim then you might have a point.