The decision by university police to use chemical agents to disperse a crowd gathered in the North Village earlier this month was irresponsible and dangerously escalated the potential for serious bodily damage.
On March 20, about 400 people – a mix of UCLA students and individuals not affiliated with the university – gathered in the area of Landfair Avenue and Ophir Drive in front of the University Cooperative Housing Association soon after the Undie Run, an unofficial quarterly tradition, came to a close.
About 20 to 30 officers arrived at the scene using protective gear and issued calls for dispersal as a response to multiple reported noise disturbances, according to UCPD spokeswoman Nancy Greenstein.
Witnesses told the Daily Bruin that some members of the crowd engaged in reckless behavior – jumping on cars and damaging private property. Once university police arrived, several members of the crowd turned their aggression toward law enforcement, throwing bottles and rocks at UCPD officers, Greenstein told The Bruin soon after the incident.
When the entire crowd failed to disperse, UCPD officers responded by forming a line and firing pepper balls – small balls filled with the same powder used in pepper spray – at the crowd.
Too many details about the incident remain unclear, and the UCPD must investigate and present a public explanation of its decision-making and actual use of the chemical-filled pellets against a crowd numbering in the hundreds.
Did the level of force employed correspond with the threat posed by the assembly? Did officers act appropriately when they fired pepper balls at students observing the scene from their private residences? Will the department respond to allegations by witnesses that some officers acted unprofessionally, shoving students who asked questions and refusing to provide badge numbers?
All these questions merit a detailed and public answer.
It is clear that the lawless actions of those people responsible for damaging private property as well as those who turned their aggression toward the police should be condemned and surely merit response by the UCPD.
But by using pepper balls in reaction to the harmful behavior of a handful of people, the UCPD made targets of everyone at the scene.
A pepper ball can’t tell the difference between an individual causing damage to private property and a person guilty only of joining a loud, sprawling gathering. Identifying and distinguishing serious lawbreakers from bystanders is the sworn responsibility of police officers, not their weapons.
The conditions under which UC police may not use pepper balls are clearly outlined in recent case law.
In a 2004 lawsuit, UC Davis student Timothy Nelson sued the City of Davis for a serious injury he sustained when university police responded to a large party at an off-campus apartment, using pepper balls to disperse a crowd of about 1,000 students, some of whom threw bottles at police, according to court documents.
A pepper ball struck Nelson in the eye, causing permanent damage and forcing him to drop out of school when he lost his football scholarship as a result of the injury.
In 2012, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vindicated Nelson under the Fourth Amendment, stating that the officers’ actions constituted an unlawful seizure and that even if Nelson had not heard or simply failed to follow the officers’ orders for dispersal, this would not be sufficient ground to apply force.
In its opinion, the court found that, “A reasonable officer would have known that firing projectiles, including pepper balls, in the direction of individuals suspected of, at most, minor crimes, who posed no threat to the officers or others, and who engaged in only passive resistance, was unreasonable.”
In Nelson’s case – he was not charged with any crimes – the only crime the police might have found him guilty of (along with hundreds of other partygoers) is trespassing, a misdemeanor. In the case of the post-Undie Run party at UCLA, accounts from witnesses and law enforcement indicate that the majority of the assembled were only guilty of unlawful assembly, which is also, at most, a misdemeanor.
Thankfully, neither members of the UCPD nor members of the crowd sustained serious injuries from the March 20 incident. However, it is clear that the use of pepper balls introduced the potential for a violation of the group’s Fourth Amendment rights.
The burden of proof falls on the UCPD to justify its use of chemical agents on the assembled students and non-affiliates. An investigation into the matter with publicly available findings isn’t just the right thing to do; it is necessary for the UCPD to fulfill its mission of providing “outstanding customer service and community policing.”