I have written previously on the importance of communication and how words matter. The term “peace officer” is sacrosanct to me. Its meaning is lofty, an ideal to consistently strive for, denoting service before self both to those you work with, but most importantly to your community. I can’t say that I always hit the mark during my career, yet I believe that by consistently thinking of myself as a “peace officer” – not a police officer – I managed to walk away from my career with my compassion and sense of justice intact.
In the aftermath of the media scrutiny surrounding the verdict in the Kelly Thomas case, the media and bloggers have missed an opportunity to ask the question of not just how this happened, but what kind of police department should we have? Manuel Ramos’ attorney John Barnett clearly won the legal argument, as the jury believed him when he stated both during closing statements and to the press, “These peace officers were doing their jobs … they did what they were trained to do.” Barnett’s use of the word “peace officer” was deliberate and was repeated by both the print and broadcast media. It was meant to portray the police actions that evening as not both necessary, but “just” in an effort to uphold our mandate and fundamental duty to serve our communities.
Yet his client’s actions, as well as the Fullerton Police Department that night, were not consistent with the history of law enforcement and the true meaning of what it means to be a peace officer. Sir Robert Peel, the father of modern policing, developed ethical principles that clarified the roles and relationship of police and the public they serve. He posited that “The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.” Going by the outcry from not only Orange County in the wake of this incident, but across the world, the public’s support and trust of law enforcement is waning, and with it, the moral authority from which it derives it power.
I am not anti-police, I don’t say this lightly, or in the spirit of being “fashionable.” I just need to point out the significant disconnect between Barnett’s use of the term “peace officer” and the policing action that occurred in Fullerton on the night of July 5, 2011.
Manuel Ramos and others relinquished the title of “peace officers” to become fascist caricatures that will forever tarnish the law enforcement profession. This relinquishment consisted of not only intentional acts but of acts of omission as well. It was Ramos’ specific interactions with Kelly Thomas that evening that escalated the incident. It was the casualness of his words and his body language, as well as the display of his baton in a threatening fashion, which tells me that this was not the first time that he had behaved in this manner, and as with all competent bad guys, this just happened to be the first time he got caught.
This is in essence is what repulses me about the jury verdict: They gave the benefit of the doubt to a police officer not worthy of the “peace officer” designation in either his words or actions. By granting him this privilege they implied that his actions contributing to the death of an innocent man were within the scope of not just policy, but the law. We can quibble all we want on the merits of the jury instructions: Did Kelly pose an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others? I would say no. Was Kelly actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight? I would say no to that as well, yet it was here that the law was subject to interpretation as the jurors heard Rackauckas acknowledge in closing statements that Kelly MAY have taken an abandoned backpack, potentially engaging in a minor crime. Here, in my opinion, is where the jurors hung their acquittal hat, ignoring any issues relative to the severity of the crime, and accepting at face value that there was an attempt to evade arrest while ignoring the instinctual response of self-preservation.
There are no words to express that convey my anger as the Rule Of Law that I once saw as good and noble was twisted and turned to protect those who don’t deserve its protection. This anger brought me back to asking not just what the purpose of policing is, but to what type of person we want doing that job. It made me think about Socrates, as he reflected on this very question challenging the government, saying,
“There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong – acting the part of a good man or of a bad.”
For me it’s crystal clear, the system failed not just Kelly Thomas, but our society as a whole. No longer can I view the law enforcement profession as I once did, when I believed that our standard was acting the part of a “good man.” So in order to make the death of Kelly have meaning we must ensure that we challenge our elected officials and our law enforcement leaders every day demanding professionalism, ethical conduct, and a system that provides both transparency and accountability. I’ve said this before, but Kelly’s death was not an anomaly – it was simply an extreme example of what happens on the streets every day – but without our input we will only continue to receive the sort of policing services that our apathy enables.
The public has crossed the Rubicon on public support of law enforcement actions (even if this questionable jury verdict might suggest otherwise.) It is the culture of law enforcement as well as the criminal justice system that requires change. An immediate first step would be to re-emphasize the “peace” in policing. We have seemed to have forgotten that our job is not just to police people but to serve all our constituents in a manner that does not betray the public trust. Rest in peace, Kelly. It is my sincere hope that you will be a rallying symbol to affect change in a system calling out for a new meaning of justice.
Thank you Diane Goldstein for speaking out. However, the silence of active “peace officers” in the FPD and throughout this country is deafening and revealing.
It is revealing that almost no one in the police community is willing to stand up for justice and state the obvious that what happened on the night of July 5th, 2011 in the city of Fullerton was not acceptable police work. For anyone to view it as such is insanity.
We do know from the comments of Cincinelli that many FPD officers contacted him to offer him congratulations for getting away with brutal behavior that lead to the death of a man who was not being arrested or charged with any crime. 1,400 pounds representing 6 officers, sat on, bunched, kicked, struck with the blunt end of a taser a 130 pound mentally ill man with no weapon, no drugs, and no chance to defend himself.
Even when the police are justified to use deadly force (which in this case was totally unwarranted), they are obligated to get the suspect medical help as soon as possible. They failed to do even this.
This shows the brutality and the callousness of these 6 men even after the deadly deed had been done. Serve and protect, peace officer, protecting the community……who are you kidding Barnett and Schwartz.
Barry levinson you are so so right, these pigs of men not of the uniform, because they would have done the same crap regardless of the uniform, but unfortunate for all of across this country we are stuck with jury’s that don’t know their Arse from a hole in the ground that believe the police do not lie and do not over react, perhaps they should invite these pigs of men over to the jurors houses to baby sit their children and lets see how they feel.
Barry my story is no where near as tragic or as blatant but I am still crippled and for doing nothing but asking the officers to observe my ADA rights along with my Civil rights Please go to my faceBook Group page Justan Othervictim and feel free to share they hell out of it and I would appreciate any assistance at justice you and the rest of the world may offer.
I guess it is a good (for the Pigs of men) that there is some mercy by the jury because God will have no such mercy and these animals, who by their behavior are probably wife beaters and child abusers as well.
Good assessment of the situation. None of it will change until we have direct civilian oversight of our police departments, which won’t happen until we vote in city councils that aren’t afraid of the police unions.
Ran into Duane Roberts on the bus yesterday as I occasionally do, and was he a geyser of words! And he told me not to quote him on this blog, but I don’t think that request was in regards to this issue in particular. If he DID intend it to be about this, then Duane did NOT say as follows:
“All civilian review will accomplish is a bunch of civilians will be able to sit around and discover that, yes, cops ARE legally allowed to kill, maim, and torture in this country. And the only reason justice ever happens is not legal or political but through UPRISINGS like the ones in Fullerton after Kelly Thomas, and the Anaheim ones of summer 2012.” Or something along those lines, Duane may or may not have said.
As usual I think he makes points but understates the importance of politics AND the law.
I think that he overstates the efficacy of uprisings.
Some of the bravest talkers in Occupy decided when push came to shove that they didn’t actually want to risk going to jail.
Hi Barry,
You are in fact correct on many counts. As I sat in the courtroom listening to T- Rack he made it clear that it was also the acts of omission that were a significant part of this case. I wondered was Wolfe not paying attention to Ramos and didn’t hear him, or was this a common practice with him. I know if I watched an officer do what Ramos did I would have immediately intervened as you can sense when someone is spinning an incident out of control.
There were many lapses in judgement and behavior including the lack of medical treatment. As much as I blame Ramos, Wolfe had an opportunity to intervene and declined to take a leadership position. I believe in some aspect that its this act of omission that is even worse.
Mrs. Goldstein,
Would you please go to my facebook group Justan othervictim and spread my story, it is not anything near what this young man suffered but it is still a crippling of an already disabled person to the point of not being able to participate as a financial contributor of my family, has caused my son to wonder why I would do as the officers ordered knowing it may cripple me, I want to explain to him that the KELLY story could have been me if I had not. I am afraid should they ever for any reason try to order him to do something he may feel it is not worth the risk of injury and try and flee or something worse. Please help me….. No one in Utah will.
i wish I could write with your eloquence. Thank you for doing this. This needs to be picked up by the MSM.
This is one of the best op-eds I’ve read since the verdict. Thank you Diane.
Thanks everyone. It really took me several days to wrap my head around the verdict and Barnett’s statement just resonated in the pit of my stomach. I don’t enjoy writing around an issue that is painful like this. My last 3 articles linked to Kelly’s death has taken a toll.
Beautifully written piece Diane.
Thank You Diane Goldstein for all you do. And for being a Real Peace Officer.
Diane — This is a wonderful and constructive essay. Gold star you you. And bless Kelly Thomas wherever he may be. The police involved — this incident makes me hope there is a judgment day.
“We have seemed to have forgotten that our job is not just to police people but to serve all our constituents in a manner that does not betray the public trust.”
Amen, well done.
Now let’s get someone who’s responsible for policing in Fullerton to say the EXACT SAME THING. Any volunteers?
These are the sentiments that I would like myself and those around me to stand for.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/rackauckas-597490-police-case.html
“But while he tried to keep jurors focused on the 33-minute videotape that showed transient Kelly Thomas struggling with the police while screaming for mercy and calling out for his father, defense attorneys were successful in introducing evidence about Thomas’ violent history and prior drug use. Rackauckas said that defense attorneys for former officers Manuel Ramos and Jay Cicinelli ‘managed to dirty (Thomas) up, make him less sympathetic as a victim.’ “
What’s interesting is that the mainstream media finally is talking about this, but that the OC Weekly and the the OJ Blog beat them to it. I sent an email to the reporter seeing if he wanted to discuss the link to the drug war, lack of training and the stigmatization of both the mentally ill, the homeless and those who may be a substance abuser. It really calls to question why we continue to criminalize an issue that should be addressed as a public health policy issues.
“why we continue to criminalize an issue that should be addressed as a public health policy issues.”
Yeah, except that neither drugs nor incrimination were even involved in the killing of Kelly Thomas. He was clean and nobody even arrested him for anything. He was just harassed, threatened, then beat to death.
Of course somehow the defense got to portray Thomas as a junkie.
@David Zenger – you are absolutely getting to the heart of the matter. Skilled, unscrupulous litigators could “dirty up” anyone, except of course those privileged individuals given protection above and beyond the normal Civil Rights afforded common citizens by laws giving “uber-rights” to a special class such as POBAR.
If anything, our law enforcement employees should be legislated to endure extra scrutiny in the form of public/peer performance reviews, regular drug testing, psychological fitness exams, and a requirement to attend professional development courses and counseling on an annual basis at minimum.
I find it ludicrous that teachers, nurses, even massage therapists are required to attend professional development courses/reviews annually while law enforcement in most jurisdictions are not given such “enforced opportunities”.
I don’t disagree with what you are saying but from my experience a significant part of the issue is that cops tend to view folk’s like Kelly as a problem, and with no compassion. Trust me their first assumption was that he was just mentally ill, or homeless but he was a chronic violent meth user. That was Barnett’s mantra until the jury believed it.
@Craig Meyers ~ You are right, but also don’t realize that there is an accreditation system in place that mandate continuing education on a number of mandatory skill sets including the use of force. This is a paragraph on a piece I am already working on based on the lack of training and resources surrounding this case.
Like all law enforcement agencies Fullerton is governed and accredited through the California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). It is POST that has both the legislative mandate and the funding to design and implement training based on best practices for all of California but has not done so in a consistent fashion. Currently POST standards require continuing education, but does not designate the number of hours, the frequency or even necessitate that training be documented.
This training I have identified is crisis intervention and dealing with the mentally ill population specifically
The FBI said Monday that it would examine evidence in the Kelly Thomas police beating death trial to “see if further investigation is warranted.”
The bureau launched an investigation in 2011 to determine whether Thomas’ civil rights were violated when he was beaten by officers after being stopped for questioning at a Fullerton transit depot.
“With the conclusion of the state court trial, investigators will examine the evidence and testimony to determine whether further investigation is warranted at the federal level,” FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller in Los Angeles said in a statement.
From the LA Times –
it is a cliche but nonetheless true….lets see where everybody is when some homeless, meth addicted asshole is threatening your wife, girlfriend or daughter.
i have had my run ins with the cops and the first thing you learn is that when the cop says sit, you sit. and someone living on the streets knows that better than most. not everybody is a victim
Of course, while Kelly Thomas was homeless, he was not meth-addicted, nor an asshole, nor threatening anyone of either gender — so what’s the relevance of your point?
The other thing that Kelly Thomas was not was entirely mentally competent due to his schizophrenia — and thus unable to grasp the way most of us would that he was in mortal danger for defying a cop. Now, mental illness is what it is, so what part of his interaction with Ramos can change? Obviously, it’s Ramos’s part of it. Not everybody is a victim — but Thomas sure as hell was.
The police — who knew that Thomas was mentally ill, but even if they hadn’t — have to be able to interact with people who get mildly and benignly defiant with them without letting things get to the point that they did. They have to be trained that way, they have to be supervised that way, they have to be held to account if they don’t act that way. Is that so radical a concept?
the video i saw, which i assume is what the jury say, is open to interpretation. and my interpretation, along with that of the jury, is that mr thomas failed to obey a lawful police order and, unfortunately, paid the price. go on a ride along with the police and understand the dangers that arise from stopping a car at two in the morning or encountering an irrational homeless person who refuses to respond.
back in the early days of irvine, when the gang bangers would visit the city and boost cars, the cops would eventually catch them and, instead of arresting them, would take the out to one of the office parks late at night and have a conversation with them about why it wasn’t a good idea to boost cars in irvine.
the residents of irvine slept better because of this and i would argue that the majority of the residents of fullerton sleep better knowing that the cops there are doing their job keeping the streets safe
@williedeville So I spent almost 22 years doing exactly that stopping people, both good and bad and never saw an officer spin up a situation like this. What you miss is that Ramos intentionally and deliberately escalated a situation and he did it because he could. He engaged in the same type of thug like behavior that you would oppose if it was coming from a gang member. I sure don’t want my community to be protected by officers like him because guess what it could happen to anyone.
What blows my mind is your acceptance of this type of policing is exactly the apathy that I write about. As for always obeying the cops. I can tell you having to have extricated officers from making bad mistakes when they didn’t realize that they were either violating policy, or the law is that we are not always right.
As for the detention and its legality as I recall Kelly only dug through the trash and had items that other’s threw away. Ramos never once tried to find vehicles that had been burglarized, never once contacted the reporting party to do a positive identification that it was Kelly that was trying doors. He engaged in lazy policing from beginning to end. As for his so called conditional threat there is no training, policy or procedure that would support what Ramos did. He was officious which means assertive of authority in an annoyingly domineering way, esp. with regard to petty or trivial matters also violating a police code of conduct that we all swear to uphold.
Now we hear that five cops in Oklahoma recently jumped on a father named Luis Rodriguez – something to do with his wife slapping their daughter, and Luis not immediately co-operating with the police – and sat on him till HE suffocated. I hear now that cops somewhere did the same thing to a retarded highschool student recently? Is the new warning gonna be “Cooperate or we’ll sit on you till you die”?
Hat-tip Paula.. http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/25/1280319/-Watching-your-husband-die-at-the-hands-of-police-Warning-graphic-video?detail=email