Not surprising - in a country that now condones torture and has steadily eroded the 4th amendment and now due process, I wouldn’t expect anything less.
 

Oh I can hear it now.. all the conspiracies that the cops are all in cahoots with this.  What a crock.   Mr. Mayor, congratulations on being the biggest fool of the year.

On the important qualifier, I would have thought the selective enforcement employed by the officer to ignore the jaywalking by the white offenders and only enforce against the black males (officers  were on the look-out for the other guy with him) and ignoring the jaywalking committed by the black female would have qualified as a civil rights violation. What is a federal civil rights violation?

Wait, you think this is an erosion of civil rights?  When Jerry was a cop that kid would have gotten beaten to a pulp while a couple other cops held him down.  
It’s pretty obvious no one committed a crime.  The question is whether or not the officer made the whole department look bad by being a bigger asshole than the asshole he was arresting.

I agree with the audio and video.  However, we have the audio and video right on the entire incident, and what do we know?  
 
I know that 3 different investigations have found that the police did used force in compliance with the rules and/or did not violate the young man’s civil rights, I think.  I also know there are still a lot of people out there who disregard all those investigations and are going to think what they’re going to think regardless.  
 
The only thing I really know 100% for sure, is that if the young man in question would have either left the scene without causing a scene, or complied with the officer without resisting arrest, we likely would not be talking about his situation.  
 
I think there should also be an independant investigation into whether or not the yound man actually did tell his mom about the incident, as he threatened to do in the video.  Has anyone looked into what kind of long term damage has been done to the arresting officer’s mental state, knowing that this young man either has, or may at some time in the future, tell his mom.  I mean, he said he couldn’t wait to tell her….  Time will tell.

But is this video still eligible for the
$100,000 prize on America’s Funniest Home Videos?
(Dear Mare G, stop wasting our tax dollars. Drunk punks cruising the streets at 2 am who act lawless get the Mace.)  hahahaha

@Concerned Citizen:
There is a hiliarious article, “How To Interact With The Police,” over on the UCIMC website that reflects your concerns.

It could be worse - you could live in Las Vegas:
http://m.lvsun.com/news/2011/dec/06/metro-should-be-gravely-concerned-about-police-sho/

@ConcernedCitizen:
I don’t think these issues are entirely the perps fault.  However, what is frustrating is that individuals are placing blame solely on the police without acknowleding that had the arrestee in this case and Calvin Miller, for example, simply cooperated with police, then the situations likely would not have escalated to the level they did.
I would like to see a video showing someone cooperating with police in which the police are verbally and/or physically abusive.  So far, I’ve heard stories, but never seen proof of this. 

Often individual remember situations very differently than they actually occurred. Calvin Miller provides a very good example of this.  Many, many people took his story at face value and believed every word of it.  Once most of it was proven wrong, many people still beleived the police abused him without considering that most of his injuries could have been sustained from jumping out of a moving van, running from police, and/or jumping over a fence. He then stood in front of the city council and said “I did not resist” when the video later showed he DID resist by evading and running.  So, while I acknowledge that some police officers can be rude, quick to resort to pepper spray or other methods of gaining complience, what frustrates me is complaints without acknowledging that the arrestees in both cases likely would not have been hurt at all had they cooperated with the police officers requests.  The officer in this case had been called to a large fight- we do not know what, if any, interaction he or other officers had with the arrestee earlier in the evening.  He may have had a reason to want to ask him a few questions (that may have had nothing to do with his skin color or jaywalking).  However, the arrestee immediately tried to run and argue. It would have been really funny if the cop had seen the kid drop something and was trying to return it to him (but I doubt that was the case).

I find it hard to believe that the only reason the officer wanted to talk to this kid was because he jaywalked.  I find it easy to believe that he charged him with jaywalking because it is, in fact, against the law, and the kid was being loud, uncooperative, and annoying.  Maybe that’s not right, but I don’t really feel sorry for the guy either. 
By placing blame solely on the police and/or the “rogue” police officers, we are teaching our young people (and by young I mean actually kids, not 18-19 year olds) that evading police, yelling profanities at police, and refusing to cooperate with police can lead to local celebrity.  And, pissing the police off enough that they use pepper spray means instant community outrage. 
We are teaching young people the wrong message.  Martel Miller insinuated twice last night that if nothing is done, he’s concerned the police officers may not come home at night.  Is that a veiled threat?  What does rhetoric like that teach our young people about how to respect authority (including parents, teachers, counselors AND police officers)?
 

@ResponsibilityMatters:
“Martel Miller insinuated twice last night that if nothing is done, he’s concerned the police officers may not come home at night.  Is that a veiled threat?  What does rhetoric like that teach our young people about how to respect authority (including parents, teachers, counselors AND police officers)?” I’ve heard Miller say that too. It is not a veiled threat. It is a serious warning that some rogue officers have behaved so poorly in the north end neighborhoods for so many years, that Miller is hearing talk that some in the ‘hood are becoming very frustrated that the police department is not addressing their grievances, and will not address their grievances; and therefore, maybe the police need a dose of their own medicine. While that sounds frightening to you and me, it’s what Malcolm X routinely advocated for when discussing the need and moral logic for self-defense against a warring, occupying army that the police have become in the eyes of low income people of color. It’s a warning that city officials should heed. Miller tried to warn police months before Kiwane Carrington was shot, that officers need to stop pulling out their guns when talking to black youth because there’s going to be an accident and you can’t put the bullet back into the gun. The police didn’t want to hear it and Oct. 9 came anyway. Miller is trying to protect the police department from what somebody else might do. He is not threatening police officers, he’s warning them that they had better change their ways because some in the ‘Hood are not willing to just take it year after year, and don’t have Miller’s patience and willingness to work within the system. Miller doesn’t want anything to happen to the police. He wants them to respect the legal and civil rights of black youth, and not abuse their authority; like police do in the white neighborhoods. If police don’t stop abusing their authority, Miller can’t control what somebody else might do, in the name of justice. That’s my understanding of that kind of rhetoric.

@ResponsibilityMatters

”...the arrestee immediately tried to run and argue…. and the kid was being loud, uncooperative, and annoying….” I appreciate your honesty. You are partly right. The Kid did argue with Officer Simons about Simons selecting him out for reasons the kid did not understand. No where does Simons initially explain why he’s grabbing the Kid. I also appreciate your characterization of the Kid’s speech as “loud and annoying.” That quality is what sets off Simons’ temper and has justified EVERYTHING police did in response for much of the public. However, the Kid did not try to run, and did in fact, <span style=“text-decoration: underline;”>according to the video</span>, physically cooperate. The Kid immediately stopped when Simons approached him with a cannister of pepper spray, allowed Simons to take control of his left arm, allowed Simons to push him toward the squad car, walked with Simons to the squad car, put his right arm (which was free the entire time) on the hood of the squad car, and all his arm motions were part of his speech, and not directed at Simons before Simons applied the pepper spray. The Kid then allowed his arms to be handcuffed behind his back, and allowed himself to be placed in the squad car. To illustrate just how cooperative the Kid was, consider this: the Kid just so happens to be an accomplished high school wrestler (placed 3rd in state.) If the Kid had wanted to resist the porky Officer Simons, he probably had better expertise than most citizens, and probably would have been successful. (And NO, Officer Simons did not know in advance that the person he was dealing with had extra special skills toward resisting arm holds and was probably in shape enough to run twice as fast as Officer Porky.) So what it comes down to is the use of painful force was applied because the Kid’s speech was loud and annoying. If that’s the case, then we either need to hold the officer accountable for excessive force, OR, change the use of force policy to include that whenever citizens use loud language or profane language at an officer, the officer is authorized to use painful force. Sadly, members of the FOP would provide explanations why that standard is a good idea; and many African-Americans in this community would testify that’s been policy for years. Which is why Officer Simons is unconcerned when it’s brought to his attention by the Kid that Simons’ use of pepper spray is being video recorded.

@ResponsibilityMatters:
“I would like to see a video showing someone cooperating with police in which the police are verbally and/or physically abusive.  So far, I’ve heard stories, but never seen proof of this.”  Well those videos are hard to come by, and even this one is not ordinarily seen. Few defendants, who are the victims of officer abuse, can afford a good attorney like Mark Lipton to pursue the facts- nor is the complaint process down at the police station fair or impartial. Rogue officers have enjoyed the benefit of having their misdeeds documented solely by the victim’s word against theirs for years, judged by one of their fellow employees who has an interest in keeping the department’s reputation safe from public dismay. Dr. McColley’s prescription that we should strap body cams to officers is probably a good idea, and one that would protect the good officers, whose justified actions would be documented accurately. You’ve heard the stories but never seen the proof? You are looking at it now, especially after the 15:00 minute mark on this video. The suspect is handcuffed, and in the back of the squad car. The suspect indicates he no longer wishes to work with the officer who has just unjustifiably pepper sprayed him, and calls by name an officer he would rather work with, and therefore will not present I.D. to the officer who seems to be just driving him around, ominously pulling into a parking lot nearby. Officer Simons should know that if his handcuffed subject won’t give him his I.D., that is not a problem. There is no hurry or worry about finding out who the handcuffed subject is. All Simons has to do is drive the handcuffed subject down to the police station and/or the jail house where he can enlist the help of numerous officers to retrieve the I.D. from a handcuffed subject. At some point, the handcuffed subject verbally indicates he has changed his mind, and will present I.D. But how does Simons react instead? He opens the back door of the squad car and violently throttles the handcuffed subject, shoving him out the other squad car door. Unidentified officer(s) insist the startled handcuffed subject “calm down”, while the Kid tries to explain what just happened to him, he was “choked.” When the unidentified officer(s) becomes also annoyed with the handcuffed subject, they apply a second pepper spraying or possibly a blow with a baton while he is handcuffed. (The Kid cries out in pain again) At 19:00 we see the handcuffed subject walked around the squad car and placed back into the squad car, where his face appears to have a fresh dose of pepper spray, and he writhes in agony for the next minute. If this is not excessive force on a handcuffed subject, then we need to re-write the use of force policy to include that officers are authorized to use painful force on handcuffed subjects when subjects use loud or profane language at an officer.

@ResponsibilityMatters:

“By placing blame solely on the police and/or the “rogue” police officers, we are teaching our young people (and by young I mean actually kids, not 18-19 year olds) that evading police, yelling profanities at police, and refusing to cooperate with police can lead to local celebrity.  And, pissing the police off enough that they use pepper spray means instant community outrage. 
We are teaching young people the wrong message.”  No. “We” are not teaching young people anything. It’s the hypocritical Drug War, some members of the Rogue Police Division, and the don’t-give-a-damn, double standard legal profession who are doing the teaching. Young people are not stupid. They know that in a world swimming in alcohol and cigarette addiction, what sense is throwing their relatives and friends in prison for decades for the less toxic marijuana plant, and the imported cocaine from South America and the opiates from Afghanistan? And to do so strictly along racial lines? The law loses all credibility when it tries to stomp on certain people for feeling good. ResponsibilityMatters, you say, ”...I acknowledge that some police officers can be rude, quick to resort to pepper spray or other methods of gaining compliance...” do you really? When rogue officers routinely insist young people tell them where they live, who their friends are, track them for their identities and whereabouts, subject them to unwarranted search and seizures, issue expensive city tickets for petty offenses police don’t issue to the white U of I students (like jaywalking), call them names, and are quick to get violent and falsify police reports later when they protest; first line of defense is to get away from the police ASAP. Combine that with the duplicative laws in city court where all civil rights are stripped away, the overwhelmed public defender’s office unable to adequately investigate a charge and prepare for trial, the extraordinary cost of the private attorneys who could provide such legal representation, the extraordinarily harsh punishments defendants are forced to plea to or to likely get after all-white juries are deceived, the financial burden of expensive fines and fees, the invasive monitoring of drug and alcohol testing, the torture of having to live for all those years in the concentration camp hells that are the penetentiaries, and be forever banished from the economy for having a felony conviction; evading this whole rotten, racist system almost makes sense. Little surprise that a few profanities get thrown at the system (the police) at the moment your life is about to go off the cliff.

As for local celebrity, realize that Officer Simons paid a visit to the young man in this video in his neighborhood, and two other officers had to stop Simons from harassing him. You think Calvin Miller has enjoyed the press he’s received lately? And Kiwane Carrington’s grave was spat on by the FOP and the State’s Attorney when they blamed Carrington him for his own death. Martel Miller and Patrick Thompson were charged with Class 2 felonies when they produced a video documentary of police interacting with citizens in the public way. Coming forward publicly to complain about the police or legal profession carries the risk of retaliation. Members of CUCPJ have said there would be a lot more cases, but most regular people don’t go public lest they face the wrath of local law enforcement.

The instant community outrage has actually been a long, long protest that began in earnest after Edgar Hoults was killed by police in 1970. But in segregated Champaign County, few have been able to hear the outrage when the system is careful not to bring the outrageous behavior to the well-to-do neighborhoods and the media often ignores what’s going on in the poor neighborhoods.

”...what frustrates me is complaints without acknowledging that the arrestees in both cases likely would not have been hurt at all had they cooperated with the police officers requests.” You assume all police officers’ requests are always lawful, respectful and serve the greater good. How would you like for a rogue officer to pick you out while you’re standing there doing nothing, and command, “Hey, nigger, get over here and let me see what’s in your pockets.” You might already know that the Supreme Court has long ago gutted your 4th Amendment right to protection from an unwarranted search and realize you have no legal leg to refuse the rogue officer’s “request.” But never would you feel inclined to “cooperate” with such a situation, and would rather have had the opportunity to avoid this officer’s detection. “Getting hurt” does not depend on a citizen’s cooperation- that is, agreement to what the officer is doing. “Getting hurt” should only come up when a citizen jeopardizes an officer’s physical safety. Verbally insulting an officer, verbally disagreeing with an officer, getting caught with drugs, or having committed a crime only a few minutes ago (even a violent one or fleeing) should not give the officer the right to inflict painful force-UNLESS- you are physically resisting and fighting the officer’s attempts to put the handcuffs on you and put you in the squad car. Otherwise, officers should be grown ups and are required to take the noise they often get from the drunken and angry citizenry. I know it’s tough but that’s the job, and that’s why I advocate for increased pay for officers. $80,000 starting pay. Veteran patrol officers with over 10 years service should be making 6 figure salaries easy. You can bet their jobs are a whole lot harder than the City Manager’s and the Chief of Police’s.
At the same time, officers have to recommit to being peace officers. They are not to be out looking for a confrontation, manufacturing crimes (like controlled drug buys), provoking the citizens, or escalating the violence. What would a rational conversation have looked like between equal adults under the law in the video above?: “Hey, guys, it’s really unsafe for you and the oncoming drivers to walk against the traffic light like that..” To which the youth would have replied, “Yeah? Well it’s really unsafe for you, officer, to use your squad car like a weapon and nearly run us over and park it in the middle of the intersection, blocking traffic, and what kind of message are you sending holding onto your jumbo cannister of pepper spray there? You looking to hurt somebody?” You are right, ResponsibilityMatters, citizens should want to cooperate with police. But cooperate with what?  What’s equally frustrating is that the police, the City, and the courthouse won’t acknowledge that a few officers have been cheating, lying and hurting the citizens unjustifiably for years, if not decades. What I hear the loudmouth activists to be saying to the police and the legal community is get your house in order, accept some oversight, follow the rules, and get rid of the few employees who can’t seem to do this. In a transparent democracy, you’d think this wouldn’t be such a tough thing to do. Then people could trust the departments again and citizens would have no excuse to not cooperate with police.

@ResponsibilityMatters:
”... most of [the Calvin Miller story] was proven wrong, many people still beleived the police abused him without considering that most of his injuries could have been sustained from jumping out of a moving van, running from police, and/or jumping over a fence. He then stood in front of the city council and said “I did not resist” when the video later showed he DID resist by evading and running.” The soundtrack of that video proved the most important part of Miller’s story to be correct, and that is why I suspect Champaign City Attorney Fred Stavins had the video pulled from the internet. While Calvin Miller should not have run from police when they zoomed up from behind with lights flashing, Miller was scared (because of the Carrington killing) and tried to flee. This now is a common reaction to the police among young people. Had you gone to the Carrington Candlelight Vigil held days after Kiwane’s murder by police, you would have heard the fear and rage expressed among the youth. I overheard one to say, “The Champaign Police are now our enemies. They started it.” It’s been a miracle that nothing has happened since Greg Brown’s murder in 2000. The Miller video clearly showed that Miller’s injuries were not sustained during the flight from police. When Miller says, “I did not resist,” what he means is when he got to the fence in the backyard, he stopped, turned around, and put his hands up. It’s then, corroborated by the soundtrack from the video, that Officer Jon Lieb began to strike Miller with a baton. Many in the community believe that Miller’s beating was justified because he ran from the police. If so, the use of force policy needs to be changed that officers are authorized to inflict painful force on surrendered subjects as a means of on-the-scene corporeal punishment for past attempts to flee. (And therefore, the Rodney King beating would have been perfectly legal and normal.)   

@ Local Yocal. Thank you for the information.  You provide a historical context for those of us who have not lived in the area for 20+ years.  And,  you do make a good point regarding the financial barriers for some members of our community to bringing this information to light.  I don’t wish to debate with you. I agree with some of what you say and disagree with most.

My point is that, in order to gain broader support for the assertion that the Champaign police (or “rogue” officers) are out of control, I think using the Calvin Miller situation is actually highly divisive given that so much of his story proved to be wholly untrue, though Brian Dolliner did not correct or remove the factually incorrect story from here or UCIMC and someone deleted all posts that included the link to the video.  (However that site did post the video of the pepper spray incincident).  I also listened very closely to the Calvin Miller video and did not hear ANY evidence of a beating.  He was talking, asking for water, and not screaming in pain.  Regardless of what really happened, it’s simply difficult to believe his story because his father was so quick to incite anger in the community and make false accusations.  Furthermore, I don’t understand the rationale that he ran out of fear because of the Kiwane Carrington tragedy.  He was driving a car, not trying to get into a house.  While it’s understandable to be fearful, running and resisting only makes the individual appear guilty.  How are the police supposed to know whether or not someone fleeing is armed?  Until the individual is cuffed, he or she can still access potential weapons. I am not making any statement as to what appropriate use of force is.  I don’t know . I am not a police officer, nor have I ever tried to get away from police officers.  I am simply saying that it’s difficult to argue use of force when the individual clearly put many lives in danger (other citizens out driving or walking a dog, etc) in an effort to flee.  As for the pepper spray case.  Again, I don’t know the whole story, and I don’t believe the kid deserved to get sprayed. However, my point was simply that he did resist as defined by the law and departmental policy so we should be looking at the law and policy in addition to the officer’s enforcement of it.  The local celebrity comment was sarcastic.  Sorry.  I honestly feel badly for both men as I feel they are both being exploited.  Particularly Calvin Miller.  The UCIMC story should have been removed when most was proven false.  Whether he was very, very confused or intentionally lied, many people fully believed him and reprinted his story as fact.  This is very divisive and does not help the cause. Finally, I have no problem with the agenda of of CUCPJ- however, I wish they would change their name as I do not see them working with any of the youth and young adults who are commiting violent crimes to work towards peace.  If their goal is to serve as a watchdog for local police, great.  But, the name is misleading as they do not seem concerned at all about the violent crimes occurring in our community.  Thank you again.  I do appreciate your perspective, and I hope you can appreciate mine.  May we all work together towards a more peaceful, respectful, and just community.

@ResponsibilityMatters:
Yes, I do appreciate your perspective, one that is common, but unlike many of the cynical blogging reps from the police department and the FOP, is actually sincere, which is why it was worth it to me, to answer your post at length.
The Calvin Miller video was removed from the internet, but not by Smilepolitely or The News-Gazette. City Attorney Fred Stavins had it removed. You say, “I also listened very closely to the Calvin Miller video and did not hear ANY evidence of a beating.” Below is what I heard while that video was briefly on the internet: 
02:04- Second officer arrives nearly hitting a running Calvin. We don’t see the officer leave the squad car on foot. Assumption is he gave chase.
02:15- chain link fence is heard rattling.
02:17- Unknown officer gives an inaudible command. What is audible is an officer says, “Get back here!”
02:24- Beating begins, Officer Lieb is grunting in time with the blows, and Calvin shouts, “Okay! Officer stop!” Then something inaudible.
02:39- You can hear Calvin saying, “Officer please don’t do this.”
02:42- Calvin keeps repeating something like, “You’re on my wrist for real. You’re on my wrist for real.”
There was the medical report that indicated Miller had 2 bruises to his scalp, a swollen jaw, the blackened eye, and his ankle had a bruise. Those injuries do not corroborate to the police version of using a single fist to hit Calvin in the eye.
You say the above does not help you believe Calvin was beaten by officers after Calvin surrendered because, “... his father was so quick to incite anger in the community and make false accusations.” The community, (some of it anyway) have been angry for a long time over incidents like this with police. Miller is not orchestrating community anger, it is already there and not dependent on Miller. As for false accusations, Miller is only accusing the police of racial profiling, a complaint supported by six years of statistical facts gathered by the police; and police brutality, in that some police are violent and aggressive when patrolling the African American neighborhoods. Miller produced two other recent victims to this abuse at a press conference he held at police headquarters. Just two days ago, a black-owned barber shop held a town hall meeting about police brutality. Something is going on, and it’s not just Miller who perceives it. My understanding of Miller’s charges is he does not condemn the police as a profession nor charge the entire department for perpetuating these conditions; but rather has named specific Champaign police officers who are terrorizing the African American community.
ResponsibilityMatters, you state a contradictory position where you say, “I don’t understand the rationale that he [Calvin Miller] ran out of fear because of the Kiwane Carrington tragedy… While it’s understandable to be fearful,...well, which is it? It’s not that the Carrington situation and the Miller situation were identical that made Calvin afraid. It’s that Calvin was dealing with the same department that killed Kiwane. Whether you’ve heard and understand it or not, black youth in this community truly believe Champaign police don’t respect them, violate their civil rights, and want to harm them. Had you gone to the press conference after the Kiwane incident, the candlelight vigil, and the discussion at the Don Moyer’s Boys and Girls club on Oct. 22, you would be aware of the distrust and fear youth have of the Champaign Police. Sadly, rogues like Officer Tim Atteberry, as he said at a city council meeting, like it that way; believing as he does that black people are thugs. Calvin ran from police because the guys flying up in the flashing lights behind him were going to harm him, so Calvin imagined. Unfortunately, Calvin was correct.
”...running and resisting only makes the individual appear guilty.” Guilt, real and imagined, does not authorize the police officer to inflict pain as part of on-the-scene corporeal punishment. Punishment is for the courts, not police officers.
“How are the police supposed to know whether or not someone fleeing is armed?  Until the individual is cuffed, he or she can still access potential weapons.” In the Miller case, police had a pretty good idea Miller was unarmed (which was the case) because Miller stopped running, turned around, and put his hands up. Police did not need to beat Miller with a baton after Miller had surrendered. Had the subject been armed, the police officers’ technique couldn’t have been worse. Chasing after a subject in the dark, who has ducked behind a house is a great way to be greeted by a bullet to the face. However, Calvin is a good kid who would never harm police. And police knew this in advance. As Finney indicated in a recent quote in the media, CPD have been profiling Calvin Miller for the two short years he’s had his license. Since Miller drives while black, he’s been stopped by police over a dozen times. Hence, Finney says to the media, “We don’t understand why he ran, he’s never given us trouble before.” 
”...it’s difficult to argue use of force when the individual clearly put many lives in danger (other citizens out driving or walking a dog, etc) in an effort to flee.” So ResponsibilityMatters, you would support police using on-the-scene painful force to punish people for potentially putting lives in danger? That needs to be in the use of force policy if you do. Consider this, police did not help matters by engaging in the high speed chase themselves. Once police had the license plate, make, and model of the vehicle; in the digital age, it doesn’t take long nowadays to find a car, the address of the owner of the car, and as you could see on the video, deploy numerous officers within minutes. What many have wondered is why the hell did police have to engage in the same conduct as the fleeing subject? What’s the damn hurry? Why turn a speeding ticket into Wildest Police Video Pursuits? Calvin was dead wrong to run from police, but Calvin is completely right to fear this department. They are unable to control their tempers and seem eager to have confrontations with citizens- the critique leveled at the CPD by a use of force expert, D.P. Van Blaricom, who analyzed the Larry Martin shooting from 2006.
“I don’t believe the kid deserved to get sprayed. However,... he did resist as defined by the law and departmental policy so we should be looking at the law and policy in addition to the officer’s enforcement of it.” Now you’re talking. We’ll see you at the meetings then. Do you disagree, ResponsibilityMatters, with Chief Finney’s, the Illinois State Police’s, and FBI’s assessment that officers did nothing wrong (you did say the kid didn’t deserve to get sprayed)? Do you agree Officer Brian Aschell was right to slam the kid’s face against the hood of the squad car AFTER the pepper sprayed kid was handcuffed? How do you feel about Officer Simons opening the back of the squad car and throttling the handcuffed subject by the throat? How do you feel about pepper spraying people a second time after they have been handcuffed? If officers did nothing wrong, then we seriously need to readjust that use of force policy, assuming the public has a right to know what the use of force policy is. 
“The UCIMC story should have been removed when most was proven false.” Disagree. What I think needs to happen is Professor Dolinar needs to do another interview/article with both Miller and his dad, and opening question is: “What the fuck?”
“CUCPJ- I wish they would change their name as I do not see them working with any of the youth and young adults who are commiting violent crimes to work towards peace.” Aaron and Carol Ammons host S.P.E.A.K. Cafe, were co-founders of Campus Academy, co-host a radio show on Saturdays on WEFT, organize the reintergrating of citizens into society after felony convictions, and helped start the community garden on Randolph Street. Prof. Belden Fields helped facilitate the carpentry apprentice program the City of Champaign deployed last summer, and CUCPJ advocates the public quarter-cent sales tax be devoted to more youth programming. That’s just a few things off the top. My understanding of CUCPJ, having visited that group, is they are a small band of volunteers with no budget and no income and go where the calls come in. CUCPJ, according to their literature, has goals to start citizenship classes, small business start-up classes, and running for elections classes as their intent. I’m told they have not had the manpower, time or finances to complete such things and mostly deal with the next crisis that comes in over the phone. Since the dismantling of the Urban League, the fact that churches in Champaign County mostly help with lack-of-stuff-poverty issues, the abysmal and ineffective leadership of Rev. Chambers at the NAACP, the decimating of the public defender’s budget, the refusal of private attorneys in Champaign County to address civil rights violations (the lone exception: the late Bob Kirchner), and the refusal to accept female leadership by the Ministerial Alliance; CUCPJ’s 12 or so volunteers have been forced to take on these criminal justice issues because simply, “no one else will.” CUCPJ does not intend to function in this role forever. They would rather be organizing youth programming, enterprenuerial endeavors, ect. than deal with what not even the FBI will touch. While CUCPJ can’t stand idly to police officers systematically brutalizing the citizenry; I’ve heard Aaron Ammons acknowledge, “If you’ve been dealing drugs, and cuttin’ up in the streets and get your ass whooped by police, it’s too late to call me from jail complaining about a civil rights violation.” CUCPJ would rather deal with this stuff at the front end. It’s the outrageous behavior of law enforcement that forces their participation.

@ Local Yocal- Thank you for the broader definition of CUCPJ- I did not find most of what you shared on their website.  Very helpful
Regarding the video- What I was saying is that I was reading the UCIMC post, saw a comment to a link with the video.  Five minutes later the comment was removed.  I later saw comments referencing the removal of the video, but then those comments were removed.  This all occurred while the video was still posted here and in the News-Gazette and on the City of Champaign website.  The comments linking to it were removed from UCIMC only while other comments were not removed.  I should have clarified. 
Regarding Calvin Miller- what I was saying is that, based on the Finney comment you reference, he’s had other interactions with police in which he was not abused.  So, why run now?  I don’t believe I contradicted myself as from what I have seen (and again I am speaking as someone who as been in the community for only around 10 years), running from the police is more likely to result in the individual getting hurt, than NOT running. 

I did not hear what you heard on the video.  Here’s what I recall hearing:
2:04- Second officer arrives nearly hitting a running Calvin. We don’t see the officer leave the squad car on foot. Assumption is he gave chase. (okay—can’t really blame him here as Calvin ran in front of a moving car…if someone ran in front of your car, you’d probably nearly hit them too—they didn’t know he was going to jump out of a moving vehicle.
02:15- chain link fence is heard rattling. I heard this and also read that he jumped over it—not sure what really happened.
02:17- Unknown officer gives an inaudible command. What is audible is an officer says, “Get back here!”
02:24- Beating begins, Officer Lieb is grunting in time with the blows, and Calvin shouts, “Okay! Officer stop!” Then something inaudible. I heard grunting and sounds of struggling…sounded to me like wrestling.
02:39- You can hear Calvin saying, “Officer please don’t do this.” Could he be referring to please dont’ arrest me.  I don’t see how this comment proves anything.
02:42- Calvin keeps repeating something like, “You’re on my wrist for real. You’re on my wrist for real.”   I heard “Am I under arrest for real?  Am I under arrest for real.”  I also heard him ask for water and the officer say they didn’t have any.

While my perception may be skewed by not having the same kinds of interactions you have had with police, I believe yours may be skewed as well.  I also read that Mr. Miller had a sprained ankle, not a bruised ankle.  Finally you indicate that he stopped and cooperated immediately.  This very well may have happened.  I am simply saying that it’s difficult for the general public to believe Mr. Miller story over the police version when so much of his proved to be false.  It’s like the boy who cried wolf.  You are stating this as though it’s fact- Did you witness Mr. Miller stop and cooperate?  Maybe he did.  But, why should he be believed when he lied about the rest.  It’s not a black issue to me, it’s an issue of integrity and honesty.  I don’t think he’s a bad kid.  I think he made poor choices. 

As for why the police chased him- I don’t disagree with the chase.  He was actively evading, which usually means the person did something wrong.  Let’s just break away from Calvin Miller and imagine that a police officer observed a car leaving driving erratically, leaving a party on campus on November 14th.  But, following your logic, the officers just run the plates.  This car happens to be the get away car from the shooting that occurred, but the cops haven’t received the call about shots fired yet so they just assume it’s a scared kid and they’ll just catch him later… that shooter still has not been found, and the get away car was a pretty unique type of car.  It’s easy to say why wouldn’t the police let this one go, when the person didn’t do much wrong to start the chase.  But the police do not know that in advance, nor did they likely know the race of the driver.  And, while Mr. Miller has had interactions with the police, that doesn’t necessarily mean every knows him and goes after him.  Your argument just seems so, so biased.  I am trying to see this objectively.
Campus Pepper Spray- I hardly watched the video.  The man’s family didn’t want it out.  I wish their wishes had been respected- I don’t know enough about the situation to comment on what was right.  From the few seconds I saw, I don’t think he deserved to get sprayed…but I didn’t watch it all, and don’t plan too…sorry.

@ Local Yocal
I would also like to point out that I have had interactions with the police in which I did not give the police trouble.  Once I caused a fender bender, another time I was speeding, another time my car broke down at a red light and I ran it b/c I didn’t want to listen to the people honking at me anymore (I was 16).  I am sure there’s some record of me, and if the Chief of Police looked at the reports with my name in them, he could infer that I did not give the police any trouble.  I don’t see how you can make the jump to him being profiled because the Chief of Police commented that he’s not a trouble maker.

Guilt, real and imagined, does not authorize the police officer to inflict pain as part of on-the-scene corporeal punishment. Punishment is for the courts, not police officers. I agree.  By the same token Fear, real or imagined does not authorize citizens to flee, speed, run red lights, state publicly that a police car rammed them, when that was not true… etc.  My point is that when someone runs, it’s a reasonable assumption they have something to hide, and that something could be a true danger to society.  What message does it send to real criminals if the police simply don’t pursue someone who jumps out of a moving vehicle and let’s that vehicle hit a home?  The bad guys in town must love folks like you, advocating that the police not pursue people who disobey the law by refusing to pull over and actively fleeing.
As for false accusations, Miller is only accusing the police of racial profiling, a complaint supported by six years of statistical facts gathered by the police; and police brutality, in that some police are violent and aggressive when patrolling the African American neighborhoods.  I don’t disagree that there’s a problem.  I do believe many of the statistics are not being interpreted holistically, and are ignoring many important variables, such as frequency of calls to certain neighborhoods, frequency of suspects being described as black (racial profiling by witnesses sometimes), etc.
...because Miller stopped running, turned around, and put his hands up. Police did not need to beat Miller with a baton after Miller had surrendered. Unless I’ve missed something, this is Mr. Miller’s claim-that he immediately stopped, turned around, and put his hands up.  So, you clearly believe all of his story despite the fact much was proven untrue and his father said he was so scared that he drove by his own house, yet he is completely accurate in his recollection that he stopped, turned around, and put his hands up.  I still am not convinced they did beat him with a baton as your description of his injuries is different from what I’ve read and these details aren’t always completely accurate.  Stating these pieces of information as fact shows your obvious bias and inability to look at this situation objectively.  I don’t blame you for your bias, but I wish you would acknowledge it. 

@ResponsibilityMatters:
“I did not hear what you heard on the [Calvin Miller] video.” Impossible to argue with that. It would be interesting for you and I to sit down with an amplified version of the soundtrack and listen to it together. Unfortunately, the “transparent democracy” of the City of Champaign won’t allow that.
”...you indicate that he [Calvin Miller] stopped and cooperated immediately.  This very well may have happened… But, why should he be believed when he lied about the rest?” The injuries don’t match the police officer’s claims of a single punch, and there is a histrorical pattern of abuse by some members of the Champaign Police Dept., particularly officer Jon Lieb, which is why so many members of the community came out to council in response to the Miller Beating and the Kiwane Carrington Killing; (and why Trish Crowley doesn’t want to release the names of officers to the News-Gazette who have had complaints filed against them.) Remember, this game cuts both ways- why should the police be believed when the Chief lied to investigators during the Carrington investigation, Off. William Alan Myers lied about tasing inmates at the jail, Officer Kurt Hjort raped a convenience store clerk, ect.? Even so, I do believe Calvin Miller and his dad owe at least Professor Dolinar an explanation about the first interview that was reported. A follow-up article about the discrepencies needs to be done. The discrepencies have done enormous damage for some people to the problem Calvin was trying to expose. That’s why Finney was elated to release the tape to help hide what officer Lieb did later off camera and foist a few lies of their own, like, “Miller grabbed my gun belt.” 

“Campus Pepper Spray- I hardly watched the video. I don’t know enough about the situation to comment on what was right.” And yet, you jumped on this thread about the campus spray incident with the claims: ”...what is frustrating is that individuals are placing blame solely on the police without acknowleding that had the arrestee in this case [the campus pepper spray incident]...simply cooperated with police, then the situations likely would not have escalated to the level they did.” I suggest you look at the video before deciding who escalated that situation.
“Once I caused a fender bender, another time I was speeding, another time my car broke down at a red light and I ran it b/c I didn’t want to listen to the people honking at me anymore (I was 16).” I don’t think you understand what is meant by profiling. My understanding of profiling is an active pursuit by officers to enforce the teeniest of vehicular infractions as a pretext to search for bigger crimes solely because the driver is of a certain race.
</strong>“The bad guys in town must love folks like you, advocating that the police not pursue people who disobey the law by refusing to pull over and actively fleeing.” <strong>Your interpretation of my words is so off-base, I have to ask you to read my comment about high-speed chases again. Think hard what “...in the digital age…” might mean.

“I do believe many of the statistics are not being interpreted holistically, and are ignoring many important variables, such as frequency of calls to certain neighborhoods, frequency of suspects being described as black…” Well, it’s been very difficult to look at the stats holistically- police departments have refused to discuss the information with concerned citizens who have. Know why? Police would be embarrassed to inform you that the neighborhood with the most frequent number of calls for service is…class?.....CAMPUSTOWN. And the overwhelming, vast majority of traffic stops are not initiated by citizens calling the police…traffic stops are mostly initiated by officers. 
As for having a bias, sure. I’ve got one. Everybody has one. I’ve had some bad experiences with individual police officers who lied and cheated; and there is absolutely no oversight in this town, either at the City Building or the courthouse to address the grievances. Rogue officers get away with it in this town, able to rely on their fine reputations from nice people like you. So when someone else tells me they had a bad experience with a police officer, I tend to believe it. Just like your bias where, from your experience, it’s all been gravy when you interact with police, so you tend to disbelieve officers ever do wrong. Which is why I support body cams on the officers from now on. The more this stuff is on videotape, the more you and I can trust officers are justified in their use of force. Oh wait, the FOP wants videotaping the police to be kept illegal. Now who’s not operating on good faith with nothing to hide?

 

”... there is absolutely no oversight in this town, either at the City Building or the courthouse to address the grievances ...”
You are 100 percent wrong about that. You can go to the City Building any time it’s open and pick up a form to file a complaint if it falls into one of several categories.
The other poster nailed it—you have no ability to look at this objectively. That’s why even on the good points you make, I disregard them and consider the source. You and others would do well to give that concept far more thought.
</strong>
<strong>

Yeah, Q-Tips, we all consider the source when you jump on here. Though I think you are the greatest of blogging comedians, (not near the McColley level, but up there) your life experience and reading comprehension is not so funny:
As you may have not remembered reading from my #18 post: “....nor is the complaint process down at the police station fair or impartial. Rogue officers have enjoyed the benefit of having their misdeeds documented solely by the victim’s word against theirs for years, judged by one of their fellow employees who has an interest in keeping the department’s reputation safe from public dismay.”
Here is the structure of the Champaign Police complaint process (with a few tweaks after the Carrington Killing):
• Champaign does not respond to FOIA requests regarding complaints.
• Champaign demands that complaints be tendered orally to the officer who is assigned to handle the complaint, even when initial complaint is submitted in writing
• Champaign “restates” complaints to suit their needs
• Champaign requires that complainant sign a blank affidavit which officer fills in later
• Champaign refuses to provide complainant with copy of affidavit after it has been filled out by a co-employee of the target of the complaint
• Champaign refuses to reveal details (ie interview notes) of its internal investigations
• Four of five (if I recall correctly) possible outcomes of complaint process are favorable to police
• Champaign seems to selectively ignore information which would tend to support complaint when doing so is in their best interest.
• Complaints are investigated only by those who have a vested interest in finding against complainant. [i.e. The Chief of Police] There are no checks and balances whatsoever.
• Complainant has no recourse but to talk with City Manger, who also has a vested interest in finding against complainant.
This response would triple in length were I to recite how officer misconduct is (not) handled at the courthouse. Now don’t disappoint us, Q-Tips, fire off one of those hilarious, dismissive one-liners of yours to remind us just how stupid the people are you disagree with.

I am surprised your response wasn’t the novel-length, rambling, wildly inaccurate, crazily biased screed we’re used to seeing.
But I like how you assume that just because you have written something that is somehow (1) true; (2) not crazily biased and wildly inaccurate; (3) read and recalled by everyone.

While I am not surprised that another Q-Tips claim that something is “wildly inaccurate” is supported by…..nothing…other than his ability to say it in a snarky, amusing manner. Keep up the poor work as usual, oh Wise Master of the Ad Hominem argument. Belittling must make it equally so and keep you from feeling ignorant.

Thinking this morning that we’re gonna miss Hitchens, but grateful that Yocal is still here as a Local version.  His or Her detailed, knowledgable, and articulate comments on this issue should be published widely as an article. Thanks LY

Actually, LY, it’s supported by my knowledge, and I’m sure a written policy, that people can go to the City Building and file complaints. I know this because I’ve asked about it. I believe there are categories set up for the complaints.
 
You might disagree with the outcome of those complaints—which is your privilege—but that doesn’t mean the instrument doesn’t exist. Try to keep your intense bias from clouding your judgment; you say stupid, disprovable things when that happens.
 
As I said, some of your points are decent, but there’s no way I’d ever back you because I know I’d end up backing insanity. You and other people in your group would do well to take note of this; I think a number of people have similar misgivings.

So what I hear you saying, Q-Tip of Knowledge, is,... “I talked to an info-booth person once who told me there were these complaint forms, with catagories even. But I’ve never actually filed a complaint against the Champaign Police and have never experienced the process of how they are decided.” Got it.
There is no dispute that there exists paper forms alleging a complaint can be filed. The phrase “no oversight” refers to the police department not taking the complaints seriously and not investigating them fairly- like when Chief Finney reviewed the June 5th arrest. Perhaps another read at post #28 here will help you again to understand why that is.
Can I steal your line, “backing insanity”, if I ever decide to describe a stack of papers with the words “Complaint Form” on it, as representing meaningful police oversight at the CPD? Solid material as always, Q-Tips. You are hilarious.

Well, LY, you’re half-right, which for you is pretty good. I did ask about complaint procedures, and the subject of forms and categories did come up. And I did decide not to pursue one, for a combination of reasons. One or two of them might be on your list. I think I did decide it was somewhat pointless to pursue a complaint when the people reviewing it were going to be protecting one of their own.
But let’s go back to your original statement, which I quoted before but you seem to have forgotten:
“... there is absolutely no oversight in this town, either at the City Building or the courthouse to address the grievances ...”
You’re wrong. (Not new, I know.) There is oversight. You just don’t like how it works. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
You can twist the “backing insanity” phrase however you like. But I think the cold, hard reality you and others don’t want to face is you have lost the chance to get a lot of backing because people don’t want to side with someone who, for example, opposes the release of a video that shows an armed robbery taking place. Few sane people favor that type of society. I’ll put that definition of sanity up against yours any time.

@Q-Tips: on the subject of mincing words to say the same thing, thanks for understanding what “no oversight” means when you offered your real-life experience:

”.... it was somewhat pointless to pursue a complaint when the people reviewing it were going to be protecting one of their own.” 
...which equals to “no” oversight, in my opinion/description. If we agree that Chief Finney is going to protect his own, like he did in the June 5th video, how is “no oversight” to disciplining a rogue officer for misconduct a “100% wrong” description; or one that differs from “pointless”? Would you prefer “biased oversight” as a description of the complaint process, and how would that description improve the oversight from zero if the net result is nothing gets done about problems some officers are creating, even discouraging citizens like yourself from ever filing a complaint? A better attack (and we 100% know for sure that’s your favorite thing to do, Q-Tips) is to FOIA for the number of times a Champaign Police officer was disciplined for doing something to a citizen to prove there is “some” meaningful oversight, you say exists.
As for the psychological assessment based on the evidence of: ”...opposes the release of a video that shows an armed robbery taking place.” ...I would ask that there be less twisting of my words (you know how irritating twisting of words can be, Q-Tips), to accurately say, “...opposes the release of that particular video of that particular armed robbery.” For readers just joining the program, Q-Tips is referring to the Espresso Royale Robbery Video from Oct. 11, 2011, currently found on page 9 of the splog section.
I would never deny Q-Tips the chance to live in a society where he has the opportunity to see all real-life crime videos after the verdicts. Nor would I deny Q-Tips the opportunity to aid the apprehension of people he recognizes in real-life crime videos for crimes yet-unsolved, in instances where the video shows a clear facial identity. Call me insane, but I am opposed to Q-Tips racially profiling/stereotyping people based on vague images of perpetrators and/or wrongfully convicting innocent people based on vague images of perpetrators; possibilities I speculated could happen by the public release of the Espresso Royale video- the reasons for my opposition to that video’s release. Q-Tips swiftly summarized those speculations as “dumb.” Apparently now, for Q-Tips, it’s also grounds for commitment.  
I have to say, Q-Tips, in this thread, I am impressed by the recent addition of attaching reasons for the scathing insults.  

I didn’t stereotype anyone. You should look up that word and find out what it means. Seeing a video of an armed robbery taking place and making a judgment from that is not stereotyping anyone.
But thanks for showing that once again, you have no ability to keep your bias out of your posts. As a result, you often write insane, inaccurate things.
Let us know if you follow through with that FOIA idea, though.

Good news, Q-Tips, I wrote something inaccurate. There is no need to FOIA for the Champaign Police Department’s records of the names of officers it has disciplined, or have complaints filed against them (even if determined “unfounded”); because The News Gazette already has. The City of Champaign is appealing the decision that the City must comply with this FOIA request. So far, still no oversight that way .
Looks like I got too personal there for Q-Tips with an example of who would look at the Espresso Royale Robbery Video and come to wrong conclusions. So for the record, the phrase: ”...but I am opposed to Q-Tips racially profiling/stereotyping people…” is changed to ”...but I am opposed to anyone who would see the Espresso Royale Robbery Video racially profiling/stereotyping people…” Forgive me if I hurt your feelings, Q-Tips. You know how some annonymous bloggers sometimes flamethrow unfounded insults to just be contrary. The unbiased Q-Tips would never stereotype anyone, like insane. Unless Q-Tips bumps up the comedy, we’ve bored everybody else enough.
 
 

oh. oh   Mr. Miller pled guilty to all charges today.   How about those folks “who stood with Calvin” that night.   Feel like fools now?

I think the only insanity here can be found when someone tries to claim that Espresso Royale video didn’t show an armed robbery taking place.

Feel foolish? Why should they? Mr. Miller took responsibility for his actions and didn’t lie in a public court of law. Too bad Officer Lieb wasn’t caught on videotape when Lieb beat Miller up after Miller surrendered. (Say again: why are citizens in Illinois prosecuted for videotaping police officers?)
Miller has shown better character than Lieb so far. Miller has repented from “lying”, (if that’s what the video vs. article proves,) whereas Lieb has failed to own up to what he did in a court of law. According to a recent article in Smilepolitely, that seems to be Lieb’s m.o.