Thursday, April 11, 1996
Riverside deputies abuse guidelines set by departmentThe April 1
beatings of two suspected undocumented immigrants by Riverside
County sheriff’s deputies have raised serious questions about the
use of force by law enforcement officers.
The actions of deputies Kurt Franklin and Tracy Watson against
Alicia Sotero Vasquez and Enrique Funes Flores are a clear case of
excessive force and a violation of basic human rights.
The rate at which Watson and Franklin escalated the use of force
against Vasquez and Flores exceeds the standard set by the
Riverside Sheriff’s Department’s policy.
An audiotape shows that while Franklin and Watson issued orders
in English, they struck Vasquez and Flores before issuing orders in
Spanish. Neither Vasquez nor Flores speak English.
Regardless of Vasquez and Flores’ failure to comply with the
commands, the blows issued are outside boundaries set by sheriff
guidelines. Failure to comply with an order is not grounds to
strike a suspect, according to Riverside sheriff policy. The
deputies needed to feel that Vasquez and Flores posed a threat
 it is clear from the videotape that they did not.
Even if they had, Riverside policy dictates that deputies must
first attempt to subdue suspects by other means  such as the
use of pepper spray  before using their batons as a weapon.
The deputies did not attempt these measures.
In contrast, California Highway Patrol Officer Marco DeGennaro,
who recorded the beatings while at the scene, took into custody
another man without striking him or using pepper spray, and
attempted to signal another to drop to the ground.
Further, DeGennaro said he never felt threatened or saw anything
that he perceived as a threat to the deputies. According to
DeGennaro, Flores looked confused and disoriented while being
clubbed.
In addition, DeGennaro reported to his supervisor that Watson
and Franklin "were waling on those guys. All I did was grab mine
and throw him on the ground." Clearly, Watson and Franklin’s
actions are unacceptable and a clear violation of department policy
dictating the use of force.
And while it is still unclear what may have motivated Franklin
and Watson to rapidly escalate the use of force against department
policy, reactions to the beatings have been distinct.
Responses to the beatings indicate that some feel the blows
struck against Vasquez and Flores were warranted because the two
were suspected undocumented immigrants and had led the deputies on
a high-speed chase.
Still another portion of the California populace rationalized
the deputies’ actions, attributing their use of violence to an
adrenaline rush. And while others condemned the beatings, they
rationalized that Vasquez and Flores were "illegal aliens" who were
"invading" the United States.
The fact that many across the state had these types of reactions
proves that there is a growing anti-immigrant sentiment. We have
been quick to point to immigrants as the source of our economic
problems, but our economy is complicated and multifaceted. To pin
the state of our economy solely on immigration is simplistic and
naive.
That we would disregard the human and civil rights of an
individual based on their immigration status is reprehensible. The
use of excessive force is never acceptable  no matter what
their immigration status may be. To allow the growing
anti-immigrant sentiment to justify excessive force is to show a
basic disregard for human rights.