Baltimore protests

[RH31]

I'm an electrician. My job might be statistically more dangerous than being a cop. The difference being almost all of the dangers I face would be self induced, whereas anybody could be pointing a gun at a cop.

I can identify anything "live" and potentially dangerous and take the proper precautions before I touch it. Not so easy for a cop.

I guess I'd be on edge if I never knew when a circuit I was working on could kill me, just like a cop never knows whose going to pull a gun on them.

[Abu3baid]

Article from Sept 2014

http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/

Quote:

The city has paid about $5.7 million since 2011 over lawsuits claiming that police officers brazenly beat up alleged suspects. One hidden cost: The perception that officers are violent can poison the relationship between residents and police.

Quote:

Over the past four years, more than 100 people have won court judgments or settlements related to allegations of brutality and civil rights violations. Victims include a 15-year-old boy riding a dirt bike, a 26-year-old pregnant accountant who had witnessed a beating, a 50-year-old woman selling church raffle tickets, a 65-year-old church deacon rolling a cigarette and an 87-year-old grandmother aiding her wounded grandson.

Quote:

Such beatings, in which the victims are most often African-Americans, carry a hefty cost. They can poison relationships between police and the community, limiting cooperation in the fight against crime, the mayor and police officials say. They also divert money in the city budget — the $5.7 million in taxpayer funds paid out since January 2011 would cover the price of a state-of-the-art rec center or renovations at more than 30 playgrounds. And that doesn’t count the $5.8 million spent by the city on legal fees to defend these claims brought against police.

Obviously there are other reasons that push people to protest the way they did.  Including the below:

https://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/theres-another-reason-why-freddie-180208932.html

Quote:

Unemployment is sky-high, median household income is low, drug use is common, and most adults don't have a high-school diploma. The report notes that these "challenges" "contribute to a cycle of incarceration, poverty, and lost opportunity" for the community.

It was just brewing, and the fact that no one is sure how Freddie died is perplexing to say the least.

Quote:

Baltimore police officials said they arrested Gray " without force or incident " on April 12 after finding a switchblade knife on him. While in police custody, he suffered a "medical emergency" that severed his spine 80% at his neck, according to a statement from his family attorney , William "Billy" Murphy Jr.

It's still unclear exactly what happened to cause the injury.

Oh, so you arrested him "without for or incident" you say?  I think it is fair that we find out what did you guys do to him exactly?

[Golfingdad]

I believe that I am about to set the TST record for the post that is simultaneously the most ON and OFF topic.  Yesterday's Orioles game was closed to the public for safety reasons borne from the civil unrest in the city, and the announcer (Gary Thorne, I believe) decided to go all Jim Nantz on us at one point:

http://streamable.com/sbm1  (Sorry, I guess I can only embed youtube or vimeo, and this one is neither)

[disco111]

This cycle of police vs minorities has been going on for decades. Back in the 60's (during the civil rights movement and the in roads made), nothing changed. Dealings with crime was still up, plus the Black Panther's openly declared war of the NYPD and carried out the threat. During the 70's, under the guise of the Vietnam war, there were lots of demo's that turned into full blown riots, which looting became the prime target of the demonstrators. Now the 80's, with the attempted revamping of the welfare system and again, open riots and looting. You can look up the additional decades if you want, but the same familiar transparent thread that runs through each one is the minority contingent that's hooked on welfare, drugs and crime. It's easy to be lazy and either have stuff handed to you or just go and take it. Now not everybody that demonstrates is under the same umbrella as the looters. Some really want truthful answers, but someone's truth can be another's lie, it's all in if you want to believe and if if fits your agenda.

Now to follow up on a statement about the rookie cops going overboard. In my personal opinion, cops today are not trained properly. Now here's something that everyone must understand. the training concepts are approved by a panel of senior officers, that are overseen by risk management (Lawyer). The final say is determined by how much could / will it cost if this or this transpires. Here's a kind of worst case item. An officer is more likely to be cleared and justified in using his weapon, because there are / could be determining factors as to why it was used. Now take the same case and instead of using his weapon, he gets into a hard struggle / fight with the person he's attempting to arrest. That person now has cuts and bruises and or maybe a broken bone. Now this become a prime candidate for police brutality. If you've never tried to apprehend someone that does not want to apprehended, it's a hard physical struggle and sometimes the cop is physically over matched and must resort to upping the response in order to protect him / herself. We must remember that the cop always brings the gun into play, when dealing with trying to arrest someone, and if that someone could / can get that gun away from the cop, well even worst things now come into play.

There's one more salient point that must be made. Today's society, has no fear of the core judicial system, it has become a revolving door. Go sit in a criminal court room and try and follow the legal speak that transpires. The system is set up for lawyers, by lawyers, for monetary gain. If somehow justice gets served, it's nothing more than a byproduct that was accidentally served up. As for lawsuits against the city and police, it's cheaper for the city to settle claims, even when officers and the department want to contest the allegations. When the bulk of society is against the police, whether it be because of tainted reporting or even factual reports, going before a jury that does not like you (remember their human also), the likely hood of winning your case is not good.

To answer the question before it's asked........yes I was a cop.

[newtogolf]

if someone runs from a cop, it's one thing to chase him, tackle him, wrestle him into submission. But beat him? I really hope I am misunderstanding you. Show me the law that says the penalty for disobeying a cop is a baton beat down.

Officers have what is called a use of force continuum, which is basically a guide as to how much force is necessary Based on the suspects conduct. Below is an example. Theres no beating the suspect because he didn't do what you said.

In order to arrest someone it requires they place their hands behind their back so handcuffs can be applied.  If a suspect refuses to place their hands behind their back, the officer must use force.  If the suspect decides to use force, the cop has a right to use force to make the suspect compliant.

Your graphic leaves a lot of the detail out.  If you try to arrest me and I resist and start punching you in the face I'm either going to kick your ass or your going to fight back and do what is necessary in order to get me to comply.  Cops are provided batons for such situations so I'm not sure why you're outraged.

There is a lot of gray area in what it takes to arrest a non-compliant suspect which is why I support body cameras so that a unbiased 3rd party can review the video and determine if the use of force was necessary or not.

[saevel25]

Now to follow up on a statement about the rookie cops going overboard. In my personal opinion, cops today are not trained properly.

That is probably true is some areas. My uncle is a state highway patrol officer. He reviewed the video of the shooting in Cleveland of the boy who had an airsoft gun that had all the decals taken off so it looked a lot like a real gun. Basically the cop who shot the kid was put in a bad situation because the driver of the car was a rookie cop who pulled up near the kid in an improper way. It forced the cop to have to act quickly. When the boy didn't act in the way the cop asked it was either face down, what he was told to him as a real gun, or take defensive measures, shoot the boy.

The details are important.

[dsc123]

In order to arrest someone it requires they place their hands behind their back so handcuffs can be applied.  If a suspect refuses to place their hands behind their back, the officer must use force.  If the suspect decides to use force, the cop has a right to use force to make the suspect compliant.

Your graphic leaves a lot of the detail out.  If you try to arrest me and I resist and start punching you in the face I'm either going to kick your ass or your going to fight back and do what is necessary in order to get me to comply.  Cops are provided batons for such situations so I'm not sure why you're outraged.

There is a lot of gray area in what it takes to arrest a non-compliant suspect which is why I support body cameras so that a unbiased 3rd party can review the video and determine if the use of force was necessary or not.

Sure, I've said the only time beating is appropriate is when the suspect assualts the cop.  You have to grab the guy, wrestle him, tackle him, etc to get the cuffs on him.  I think if you read up on the use of force continuum you would agree with it.  The wikipedia page I linked to describes it well.  Maybe I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying that if someone resists arrest then cops should beat them and continue escalating until the suspect is apprehended.   I was disagreeing with the idea that running away justifies violence against the suspect beyond a tackle/wrestle/hold sort of thing.  Nor does "disrespecting" an officer.

I have a lot of concerns about body cameras, but that might be the answer to a lot of this.

[mmoan2]

This cycle of police vs minorities has been going on for decades. Back in the 60's (during the civil rights movement and the in roads made), nothing changed. Dealings with crime was still up, plus the Black Panther's openly declared war of the NYPD and carried out the threat. During the 70's, under the guise of the Vietnam war, there were lots of demo's that turned into full blown riots, which looting became the prime target of the demonstrators. Now the 80's, with the attempted revamping of the welfare system and again, open riots and looting. You can look up the additional decades if you want, but the same familiar transparent thread that runs through each one is the minority contingent that's hooked on welfare, drugs and crime. It's easy to be lazy and either have stuff handed to you or just go and take it. Now not everybody that demonstrates is under the same umbrella as the looters. Some really want truthful answers, but someone's truth can be another's lie, it's all in if you want to believe and if if fits your agenda.

Now to follow up on a statement about the rookie cops going overboard. In my personal opinion, cops today are not trained properly. Now here's something that everyone must understand. the training concepts are approved by a panel of senior officers, that are overseen by risk management (Lawyer). The final say is determined by how much could / will it cost if this or this transpires. Here's a kind of worst case item. An officer is more likely to be cleared and justified in using his weapon, because there are / could be determining factors as to why it was used. Now take the same case and instead of using his weapon, he gets into a hard struggle / fight with the person he's attempting to arrest. That person now has cuts and bruises and or maybe a broken bone. Now this become a prime candidate for police brutality. If you've never tried to apprehend someone that does not want to apprehended, it's a hard physical struggle and sometimes the cop is physically over matched and must resort to upping the response in order to protect him / herself. We must remember that the cop always brings the gun into play, when dealing with trying to arrest someone, and if that someone could / can get that gun away from the cop, well even worst things now come into play.

There's one more salient point that must be made. Today's society, has no fear of the core judicial system, it has become a revolving door. Go sit in a criminal court room and try and follow the legal speak that transpires. The system is set up for lawyers, by lawyers, for monetary gain. If somehow justice gets served, it's nothing more than a byproduct that was accidentally served up. As for lawsuits against the city and police, it's cheaper for the city to settle claims, even when officers and the department want to contest the allegations. When the bulk of society is against the police, whether it be because of tainted reporting or even factual reports, going before a jury that does not like you (remember their human also), the likely hood of winning your case is not good.

To answer the question before it's asked........yes I was a cop.

One of the best insights into this mess that I've read. Especially the part about the judicial system. I'm not in 100% agreement that it's all set up solely for monetary gain, but it's clear that the majority of those accused of crimes haven't the slightest idea what the heck is going on in a courtroom. The lawyers may as well be speaking Armenian.

[RJH999]

The motto never changed it's still **** cops.

[jusanothajoe]

The motto never changed it's still **** cops.

This speaks volumes

[dsc123]

This is long, but IMO important.  Its also important to recognize the difficult situation the police were facing--they were overwhelmed.  But innocent citizens don't lose their rights simply because a handful of people looted a couple stores, or because the police are too busy to do things right.

During a press conference wednesday, a reporter asked the police commissioner about the release of 100 people who were arrested, without charges.  He mostly deflected and said they're being released with the intent to prosecute them at a later date.

This is a facebook post from a public defender in Baltimore describing what she witnessed.  I must be facebook "friends" with someone who works with her because it showed up on my news feed.  Its starting to get picked up by the media, too.  In this post, she describes the scene.  Essentially 250+ protesters were arrested, very few given any reason, and stuffed 10-15 to each 10x10 holding cell for twice as long as the law allows, then, released not only without charges, but without explanation for why they were arrested in the first place.

Quote:

Marci Tarrant Johnson

OK...here it is...

I'm going to try to keep this as brief as I can, but I've been asked by several people about Central Booking today, so I'll give you guys the shocking highlights. As much as I'd like to, I can't describe the particulars of some of the more egregious arrests, due to attorney/client privilege issues, but I would like to describe the Civil Liberties violations, and the deplorable conditions which people have had to endure.

As many of you know, more than 250 people have been arrested since Monday here in Baltimore. Normally when you are arrested, you are given a copy of your charging documents and then you must see a commissioner within 24 hours for a bail determination ("prompt presentment") and given a trial date. If you are not released after the commissioner hearing, you will be brought before a judge for a review of the bail set by the commissioner. None of this was happening, so we sent some lawyers to Central Booking yesterday to try to help. I heard, however, that only 2 commissioners showed up, and the correctional officers only brought about 9 people to be interviewed because the jail was on a mysterious "lock-down".

Today we were divided into two groups. Some of the lawyers were assigned the task of actually doing judicial bail reviews for as many folks as they could get interviewed and docketed. I was assigned to the other group. We were the "habeas team", and we were to interview folks that we felt were being illegally detained, so we could file writs of habeas corpus. Governor Hogan had issued anexecutive order, extending the time for prompt presentment to 47 hours. We believed that this order was invalid because the governor has no authority to alter the Maryland Rules. As a result, all people who were being detained for more than 24 hours without seeing a commissioner were being held illegally.

Knowing all of this, I was still not prepared for what I saw when I arrived. The small concrete booking cells were filled with hundreds of people, most with more than ten people per cell. Three of us were sent to the women's side where there were up to 15 women per holding cell. Most of them had been there since Monday afternoon/evening. With the exception of 3 or 4 women, the women who weren't there for Monday's round-ups were there for freaking curfew violations. Many had not seen a doctor or received required medication. Many had not been able to reach a family member by phone. But here is the WORST thing. Not only had these women been held for two days and two nights without any sort of formal booking, BUT ALMOST NONE OF THEM HAD ACTUALLY BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING. They were brought to CBIF via paddy wagons (most without seat belts, btw--a real shocker after all that's happened), and taken to holding cells without ever being charged with an actual crime. No offense reports. No statements of probable cause. A few women had a vague idea what they might be charged with, some because of what they had actually been involved in, and some because of what the officer said, but quite a few had no idea why they were even there. Incidentally, I interviewed no one whose potential charges would have been more serious than petty theft, and most seemed to be disorderly conduct or failure to obey, charges which would usually result in an immediate recog/release.

The holding cells are approximately 10x10 (some slightly larger), with one open sink and toilet. The women were instructed that the water was "bad" and that they shouldn't drink it. There are no beds--just a concrete cube. No blankets or pillows. The cells were designed to hold people for a few hours, not a few days. In the one cell which housed 15 women, there wasn't even enough room for them all to lay down at the same time. Three times a day, the guards brought each woman 4 slices of bread, a slice of american cheese and a small bag of cookies. They sometimes got juice, but water was scarce, as the CO's had to wheel a water cooler through every so often (the regular water being "broken".)

My fellow attorneys and I all separately heard the same sickening story over and over. None of the women really wanted to eat 4 slices of bread 3 times a day, so they were saving slices of bread TO USE AS PILLOWS. Let me say that again. THEY WERE ALL USING BREAD AS PILLOWS SO THAT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO LAY THEIR HEADS ON THE FILTHY CONCRETE FLOOR.

Interviewing these women was emotionally exhausting. Quite a few of them began crying--so happy to finally see someone who might know why they were there, or perhaps how they might get out of this Kafka-esque nightmare. These women came from all walks of life. We interviewed high school students, college students, people with graduate degrees, people with GED's, single women, married women, mothers, the well-employed, the unemployed, black women and white women. Almost all of them had no record. Those that did, had things like dui's and very minor misdemeanors. Our group didn't interview any of the men on the other side, but my colleagues reported very similar situations. On the men's side there were journalists and activists, as well as highschool kids with no records, barely 18 years old.

As we were getting ready to leave, we heard that many of these folks might be released without charges, after being held for 2 days. When we returned to the office, our amazing "habeas fellow", Zina Makar, single-handedly filed 82 habeas petitions. That is when we heard that 101 people were released without charges. I'd like to think that the amazing legal response to this injustice played a large part in their release, and I feel privileged to have been a part of it. They may be charged later, but I'm guessing most of them won't based on how minor their alleged infractions are. There are still over a hundred folks in there that need to see a commissioner and/or a judge, but hopefully we have thinned the ranks a little, and we will keep fighting until everyone has received due process. (We are concerned about these folks potential bails, as we are hearing about bails in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for misdemeanor charges).

I'll wrap this up by reminding everyone that all lives matter. We are all human beings. And we are Americans, and as such we are afforded protections under the law, the guilty and innocent alike. If one person is denied due process, we all suffer. If one persons rights and freedoms are trampled on, it's not only a reflection on all of us, but it puts our own liberty at risk. The moment we view some individuals as more important than others, we cheapen ourselves. At the very essence of our democracy is the right to question and stand up to authority. During these trying times, we should all keep that in mind.

I'll leave you with a beautiful picture that was taken today of one of the women who was released without charges. Her husband had been waiting outside CBIF trying to find something...ANYTHING out about when she might be charged or released. This was taken moments after she walked out the door.....

[Abu3baid]

This is long, but IMO important.  Its also important to recognize the difficult situation the police were facing--they were overwhelmed.  But innocent citizens don't lose their rights simply because a handful of people looted a couple stores, or because the police are too busy to do things right.  During a press conference wednesday, a reporter asked the police commissioner about the release of 100 people who were arrested, without charges.  He mostly deflected and said they're being released with the intent to prosecute them at a later date.  This is a facebook post from a public defender in Baltimore describing what she witnessed.  I must be facebook "friends" with someone who works with her because it showed up on my news feed.  Its starting to get picked up by the media, too.  In this post, she describes the scene.  Essentially 250+ protesters were arrested, very few given any reason, and stuffed 10-15 to each 10x10 holding cell for twice as long as the law allows, then, released not only without charges, but without explanation for why they were arrested in the first place.

Thanks for sharing.

[newtogolf]

This is long, but IMO important.  Its also important to recognize the difficult situation the police were facing--they were overwhelmed.  But innocent citizens don't lose their rights simply because a handful of people looted a couple stores, or because the police are too busy to do things right.

During a press conference wednesday, a reporter asked the police commissioner about the release of 100 people who were arrested, without charges.  He mostly deflected and said they're being released with the intent to prosecute them at a later date.

This is a facebook post from a public defender in Baltimore describing what she witnessed.  I must be facebook "friends" with someone who works with her because it showed up on my news feed.  Its starting to get picked up by the media, too.  In this post, she describes the scene.  Essentially 250+ protesters were arrested, very few given any reason, and stuffed 10-15 to each 10x10 holding cell for twice as long as the law allows, then, released not only without charges, but without explanation for why they were arrested in the first place.

I'm in no way defending what was done to those arrested but when you consider the circumstances I'm not sure how it can be avoided.  I'd also guess that these circumstances were similar in the past when there were riots in other cities such as LA (OJ trial) and Ferguson.

While I agree Baltimore officials should have better prepared their jails and processes for the deluge of people they arrested, those arrested would not have been if they had obeyed the law and were off the streets during the curfew hours.

[Gunther]

I'm in no way defending what was done to those arrested but when you consider the circumstances I'm not sure how it can be avoided.  I'd also guess that these circumstances were similar in the past when there were riots in other cities such as LA (OJ trial) and Ferguson. While I agree Baltimore officials should have better prepared their jails and processes for the deluge of people they arrested, those arrested would not have been if they had obeyed the law and were off the streets during the curfew hours.

Truth. Classic damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Thousands of people protesting against relatively few cops so they imposed a curfew, pretty logical really. Bound to be ill-equipped to handle the folks. The alternative was to continue to give them "space to destroy" which would have kept the destruction going for days or weeks. It's a shame a few innocents got caught up in it but good lessons learned for them and no real harm done.

[disco111]

While I agree Baltimore officials should have better prepared their jails and processes for the deluge of people they arrested, those arrested would not have been if they had obeyed the law and were off the streets during the curfew hours.

Sadly, the bulk of those arrested were the, "I saw what was perhaps an injustice" and I want to lend my voice in outrage. They are in fact indirectly pawns, being used by the true trouble makers, who want nothing more than to take full advantage of a situation to loot and burn. Those folks don't live there, they come from outside the scope of those neighborhoods.

Now I have to give admiration to the mother who stepped up and went after her son. But now here in lies another serious problem, with the young generation of today. Even though she attempted to raise him right (assumption based on what she did), he still was influenced by the street and those that he associated with. We are dealing with a second generation that has little to no respect for anyone or anything. Where I currently live, OKC, every night on the news it's multiple stories of stabbings, shootings, car jacking, setting someone on fire, home invasions with beatings on women, burglaries being recorded and they look right at the camera and smile. Why, because as I stated in another post, there's no fear of the judicial system or the police. In just the past week or two, within the state, on the news there's been at least 8 officer involved shootings and all were caught on dash cams or body cams and were all justified. Now I can't speak for the rest of you that read this rant, but that's damn scary. A growing segment of our society is becoming totally out of control and extremely dangerous and I'm sure it's happening everywhere.

I'll offer just one more personal assessment........................"The worst is yet to come".

[Golfingdad]

I'll offer just one more personal assessment........................"The worst is yet to come".

I hope you're wrong about this.  But, I just read that they are charging the cops involved:  http://news.yahoo.com/freddie-gray-sustained-fatal-head-injury-in-back-of-police-van--report-124521845.html

I reallllllllllly hope that they have concrete evidence supporting those charges and that they're not a rash reaction to appease the public outraged by the slew of recent cases like Ferguson where nobody was indicted.

Because if it is the latter and it turns out that these guys didn't do anything wrong (or at least there isn't enough proof that they did) and they are found not guilty ... oh boy.

Remember that the LA Riots started not when the Rodney King video surfaced, but when the cops were all ultimately acquitted of the charges.  (Which, coincidentally, was 23 years ago Wednesday.)

"April [29th] 1992

There was a riot on the streets

tell me where where you?"

[dsc123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf

I'm in no way defending what was done to those arrested but when you consider the circumstances I'm not sure how it can be avoided. I'd also guess that these circumstances were similar in the past when there were riots in other cities such as LA (OJ trial) and Ferguson.

While I agree Baltimore officials should have better prepared their jails and processes for the deluge of people they arrested, those arrested would not have been if they had obeyed the law and were off the streets during the curfew hours.

You don't arrest them.  If given the choice between letting a peaceful protestor get away with breaking curfew, or violating their civil rights, you let them get away with being outdoors.  Every time.

At the very least, when the 24 hours is up, you let them go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunther



The alternative was to continue to give them "space to destroy" which would have kept the destruction going for days or weeks. It's a shame a few innocents got caught up in it but good lessons learned for them and no real harm done.

No, the alternative is to arrest those that are destroying, and not those that are not destroying.

If you had done nothing wrong and were locked up for two days in a crammed holding cell with a bunch of strangers and little food or water, I doubt you would walk out and declare it a "good lesson."

Quote:

Originally Posted by disco111

Sadly, the bulk of those arrested were the, "I saw what was perhaps an injustice" and I want to lend my voice in outrage. They are in fact indirectly pawns, being used by the true trouble makers, who want nothing more than to take full advantage of a situation to loot and burn. Those folks don't live there, they come from outside the scope of those neighborhoods.

Is it sad because there is nothing wrong with doing that and yet they were arrested and held in jail for 2 days--twice the length of time allowed under the law--without any probable cause finding?  Or do you think its sad that they're just too dumb to think for themselves, and it doesn't matter if their civil rights were violated?

And where do you come up with this stuff that the peaceful protesters are pawns of the looters?  And that the looters don't live there?  You're just making this stuff up to discredit the innocent civilians and justify the violation of their civil rights.

I don't mean to be a jerk, but its telling that you're so quick to make up facts about the people arrested and (separately) about the people doing damage, and apparently think nothing of the police violating their civil rights.

---

Quote:

Mosby said Gray was improperly arrested because officers had no probable cause to detain him. Officers found a knife in Gray's pants, but it was not a switchblade, as police previously said, and was legal under Maryland law.

....

Gray suffered a "severe and critical neck injury" as a result of being handcuffed, shackled and being unrestrained in the van.

Mosby said an investigation found officers placed Gray in wrist and ankle restraints and left him stomach-down on the floor of a police van as they drove around West Baltimore. Despite his repeated requests for medical attention, they did not provide it and continued to drive without securing him in the van, she said.

I wonder if the cops who are arrested will treated as poorly as the protesters were...

[Gunther]

You don't arrest them.  If given the choice between letting a peaceful protestor get away with breaking curfew, or violating their civil rights, you let them get away with being outdoors.  Every time.  At the very least, when the 24 hours is up, you let them go.  Quote: No, the alternative is to arrest those that are destroying, and not those that are not destroying. If you had done nothing wrong and were locked up for two days in a crammed holding cell with a bunch of strangers and little food or water, I doubt you would walk out and declare it a "good lesson." Is it sad because there is nothing wrong with doing that and yet they were arrested and held in jail for 2 days--twice the length of time allowed under the law--without any probable cause finding?  Or do you think its sad because they're just too dumb to think for themselves, and it doesn't matter if their civil rights were violated?  And where do you come up with this stuff that the peaceful protesters are pawns of the looters?  And that the looters don't live there?  You're just making this stuff up to discredit the innocent civilians and justify the violation of their civil rights. I don't mean to be a jerk, but its telling that you're so quick to make up facts about the people arrested and (separately) about the people doing damage, and apparently think nothing of the police violating their civil rights.   [rule] I wonder if the cops who are arrested will treated as poorly as the protesters were...

If they took the attitude that they weren't going to arrest curfew-breakers, what's the point of imposing it? I don't get the logic. The curfew helped stop the madness. If you were on the streets after curfew, it was a slam dunk, you're going downtown. Actually making those arrests showed others they were serious and it spurred them to clear the streets. As I said, lesson learned at no real cost to the bone heads who tried to test the cops.