NYPD Finally Admit That Police Broke The Rules With Pepper Spraying; May Slap Anthony Bologna On The Wrist

from the lose-your-10-vacation-days dept

After Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna was caught on video tape pepper spraying protestors and then walking away (multiple times), police spokesperson Paul Browne insisted that the pepper spray was used appropriately and that the evidence proving this was, "edited out or otherwise not captured in the video." That seemed difficult to believe given multiple cameras from multiple angles all capturing the event.

So it's interesting to see NYPD spokesperson Paul Browne (surely, not the same person) now admitting that Bologna broke the rules.

The commander, Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna, has been given a so-called command discipline, according to a law enforcement official. Officials said investigators found that the inspector ran afoul of Police Department rules for the use of the spray. The department’s patrol guide, its policy manual, says pepper spray should be used primarily to control a suspect who is resisting arrest, or for protection; it does allow for its use in “disorder control,” but only by officers with special training.

The Internal Affairs Bureau reviewed the episode and found that Inspector Bologna “used pepper spray outside departmental guidelines,” said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman. He declined to elaborate.

Apparently Bologna may be docked 10 days worth of pay. Though, I'm curious if we'll get an IAB investigation into false statements from police spokespeople insisting that something was done appropriately, and then later saying the exact opposite. Somehow, I doubt it.

Filed Under: anthony bologna, nypd, occupy wall street, pepper spray

Phony Bologna: More Evidence Of Indiscriminate Pepper Spraying, As Police Defend Actions

from the just-admit-he-screwed-up dept

NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna remains in the news, even as the NYPD ramped up their "arrest the protesters" campaign this weekend. After all of the video evidence that he randomly pepper sprayed some women at the OccupyWallStreet protests, the NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly has said that the Internal Affair Bureau would open an investigation into the actions. But at the same time, he defended Bologna's actions. Of course, at about the same time he was doing this, a second video came out, once again showing Bologna appearing to indiscriminately pepper spray people, including a credentialed photojournalist (wearing his credentials around his neck). So how is Kelly defending this? First, he blames the protesters for "tumultuous conduct." I've already said that I don't really think much of the overall protest, but the video evidence doesn't suggest that those who were pepper sprayed were involved in any such "tumultuous conduct." Later Kelly said that the group was "disorderly" and "intent on blocking traffic," and that could justify the use of pepper spray. That seems like a huge stretch. Again, the individuals who were sprayed appear to have been chosen at random.

The NYPD Deputy Inspector Roy Richter, who is basically Bologna's "union representative" is defending Bologna's actions thusly:

“Deputy Inspector Bologna's actions that day were motivated by his concern for the safety of officers under his command and the safety of the public. The limited use of pepper spray effectively restored order without any escalation of force or serious injury to either demonstrator or police officer.”

Someone else at the police department had another cover story:

A law enforcement official familiar with Inspector Bologna’s account of what occurred, however, said he was not aiming at the four women who appeared in videos to have sustained the brunt of the spray. Rather, he was trying to spray some men who he believed were pushing up against officers and causing a confrontation that put officers at risk of injury, the official said.

"The intention was to place them under arrest, but they fled," the official said.

Given how many videos of the scene and surrounding areas have been shown, it's amazing anyone can claim that with a straight face. There was no indication of these "others." There was no indication of any attempt to arrest others near the women. If Bologna was aiming at these mythical men, he's a terrible shot, because he hit those women he wasn't aiming for point blank.

In the meantime, the folks at USLaw.com remind us that Bologna wasn't the only police officer using random "escalation" techniques. They point out this video of an NYPD officer purposely tripping a protester who already appeared to be in the control of multiple officers. Of course, the act of tripping the guy makes it look like he's trying to resist arrest. Of course, once again, all of this is caught on video. It really makes you wonder if all of this kind of video evidence is finally going to lead police to recognize that they actually have to behave and follow the law themselves.

Filed Under: anthony bologna, evidence, nypd, occupy wall street

Does The NYPD Really Think That Shooting Photos/Videos Of Protests Is 'Disorderly Conduct?'

from the censorship-at-its-finest dept

The mess in NYC with the way the NYPD are handling the whole "Occupy Wall Street" situation continues. We've already covered the story of the police falsely claiming that video evidence of an incident where an officer (Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna) pepper sprayed women did not show the full story. In those posts, we highlighted the importance of photographic and video evidence from people around the incident, and noted how important the right to film police is for a functioning democracy. Now there's increasing evidence that the NYPD targeted people reporting on, videotaping or filming the police, in making a bunch of arrests.

Reporter John Farley, working for WNET MetroFocus -- which is part of New York's PBS station -- wrote the story after being arrested himself, on "disorderly conduct" charges. What was his disorderly conduct? Apparently it was attempting to interview some of those women who were pepper sprayed by Bologna. He properly identified himself to the police as a reporter, but they did not care. He was still arrested and spent nine hours in custody. While some of the others in custody with him were, in fact, protestors, some were merely bystanders trying to record what was going on. He notes two such stories. The first is of a guy who was working at a cafe right by the pepper spray incident:

The arrest of my cell mate, Sam Queary, 24, adds another dimension to the issue: that of the inadvertent, spontaneous citizen journalist. Queary happened to be at work at Grey Dog Cafe near Union Square when the protesters marched by.

“I heard a commotion and went outside to find cops macing women and arresting people and hitting people with nightsticks, so I started taking pictures,” said Queary. “I followed a young, black male as he was being accosted by five cops. As I tried to take a picture I was pushed away. I asked why I was pushed away and then the next thing you know I was being judo flipped.”

The second involved a woman who just pulled out her camera phone as events were unfolding in front of her, and had nothing whatsoever to do with the protest:

I also met Rosa A., 33, in the police van while we were being transported to the 1st Precinct for processing. She had been shopping at the Barnes and Noble on Union Square when she saw the protesters outside. As many New Yorkers do when they see something unusual, she snapped a picture. And she was arrested.

“I’ve never been arrested,” said Rosa A., in visible pain from the plastic handcuffs. “I was just there looking at magazines.” She laughed, lightening the mood in the police van. Even our arresting officer, in the van with us, chuckled.

While an NYPD spokesperson has been telling the press that police did not target those with cameras, it's hard to understand any other reason for those three people being arrested and charged. Besides, given the fact that NYPD spokespeople talking about this incident have already had their credibility destroyed by the video evidence, it's tough to take those claims seriously. Even if the police weren't officially targeting people with cameras, as Farley noted, they didn't seem to make any attempt to distinguish protesters from bystanders or press:

I don’t know precisely why I was arrested, though I have been charged with disorderly conduct. But what I realized is that in a sudden burst of urban chaos, how can the police distinguish between passersby and protesters who may be committing civil disobedience or any other type of punishable offense? Or between citizen journalists and professional journalists?

In the past, we've seen police use "disorderly conduct" charges against those who film them. It's a nice catch-all that police can use to arrest almost anyone. Perhaps we should be looking to fix the law that allows arrests on "disorderly conduct" when such a law seems to be regularly abused by police to target those who are respecting the law, but doing things the police just don't like?

Filed Under: anthony bologna, disorderly conduct, evidence, journalism, nypd, occupy wall street

Can The NYPD Back Up Its Claim Of A Confrontation That Required Pepper Spray, Despite More Video Evidence?

from the keep-the-videos-running dept

Yesterday we wrote about the NYPD claiming that the video evidence of a police officer, now identified as Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna, pepper spraying a group of women shows that it was done appropriately. The specific claim from NYPD spokesperson Paul Browne was that "Pepper spray was used once after individuals confronted officers and tried to prevent them from deploying a mesh barrier -- something that was edited out or otherwise not captured in the video."

The problem, of course, is that the video evidence suggests no such thing, and with more videos taken by other people at the same time and place indicating no such editing or confrontation, it's increasingly clear that the NYPD's Paul Browne lied to the press, and falsely accused folks of editing out a confrontation that does not appear to have happened.

The US Law blog, which has been at the forefront of covering this particular story, has linked to another video at the same place (at about 5:45 in the video). While the person taking the video is turned away from the pepper spray at the moment it happens, you can see as she walks through the women just before it happens (in fact, you can see this same person in the original video passing right behind the pepper sprayed women, seconds before it happens).

Add to that another video that actually pulls together two perspectives of the incident, which you can see below:

And, finally, we have a 4th view of the events surrounding the incident, immediately prior to the pepper spraying. From these multiple videos at multiple angles, two things are abundantly clear: contrary to the claims of the NYPD, nothing was edited out of the first video and while there was lots of screaming, the women who were sprayed do not appear to have "confronted the officers and tried to prevent them from deploying a mesh barrier" at all. Some others may have done so, but not the women being sprayed. Instead, as originally alleged, it appears that the spraying was entirely arbitrary.

Furthermore, as pointed out on the US Law Blog link above:

Having approached the immediate area from some distance away, it is difficult to understand how the Deputy Inspector could have had any instant awareness of what, if any, confrontation may have been happening at that time and place. The officer does not appear to take adequate time to assess whether the handfull of people in the immediate vicintiy were obeying police orders. In fact, his approach with outstretched arm and the surprised reaction of the blue shirted officers suggest he may have made the decision to release pepper spray in advance of his arrival at the immediate location of it's deployment.

Furthermore, they note that the NYPD rules say that pepper spray may be used if "it is necessary to effect an arrest of a resisting suspect." And yet, after pepper spraying the women, no arrests were made (some of the people sprayed were arrested later, at different locations for different reasons). It appears that even if there was a confrontation, which there does not appear to be, involving these women, the use of pepper spray was inappropriate.

Once again, what fascinates me about all of this is all of this video evidence, and the value in showing that the "official story" from the police is almost certainly false. I'm curious as to how long the NYPD will keep up the charade of pretending its version is accurate.

Filed Under: anthony bologna, evidence, nypd, occupy wall street