Arrest video provokes outrage; chief responds

1. Some people are just obstinate by nature and have real difficulty accepting any authority over them. According to other news reports, Ms. Hardaway’s behavior in court today was also atrocious, at least initially. It’s sad to see these sorts of scenarios play out, especially when people aren’t even the subject of police action but nevertheless blow up during police contact due to a character fault. It’s as if they just can’t help themselves.

   I say this especially since the consequences of getting into even a relatively minor scuffle with the police are always severe, as I suppose they should be. Obviously if you resist or run from the police, the police really have no choice but to take you to jail at least for that night. Personally I hope that the woman is able to get the charges reduced as part of some plea deal so that at least she won’t suffer a felony conviction. If she can get probation and counseling, I think it would be best.

   I think that stepping up the deployment of Tasers to the police force could help here. Without these, if you resist then the police aren’t left with much option besides to get a bit physical. With them, the police can often neutralize you rather than needing to continue in a violent struggle. Yes Tasers are already deployed among Rochester police, but only some officers are trained on (and issued with) these. In this case, it seems that none of the responding officers had one. Don’t get me wrong – a distracting/compliance strike to the head is likely preferable to using a Taser on somebody who claims pregnancy. But, consider that if either of the two officers who were arresting the brother (who was also resisting) had used a Taser to effect that arrest more quickly, Ms. Hardaway may have not had as much of a chance to interfere, or at least one of those other officers would have been freed up to help with the arrest of Ms. Hardaway.

2. Trying to figure out why this video was released? Apparently the family was hoping the video would produce outrage. To a point that’s worked – it’s clearly a rallying opportunity for the anti-police crowd and even makes mainstream news. But it seems almost certain that the use of force will be judged appropriate and justified in the eyes of the review board and probably majority public opinion too.

   Meanwhile the video is pretty-much conclusive evidence against the woman as far as the charges she’s facing. So it might make it much harder for her to mount a defense and/or get a good deal. Without the video at least she could claim the cops lied. With the video, well you can see.

3. I think Police Chief Sheppard summed it up well when he said that none of this would’ve happened if the Hardaways had complied with officers.

4. It is obvious there was a family arguement. I agree that you shouldn’t resist arrest but in this case I have mixed emotions. I myself have experienced racial discrimination from the RPD and I did nothing to be harrased but be Black woman. I have witnessed RPD beat down a young man at the Public Library and spoke to the officer that he was using excessive force. I was called a racist to excite me to respond. I didin’t I just asked for his name he then growled very nasty and threatened to jail me. So, as far as the RPD I have very little respect for them this is just a few that I am highlighting.

   I don’t think any woman Black, White,Asian, Native American or Hispanic should be hit in the head at 6 months pregnant that was distasteful and there is nothing that can justify punching pregnant woman in the head and throwing her belly down to the pavement. I don’t care what race she is, how much she weighs, how tall she is she is. The officer should be charged with child endangerment

   They need to throw this case out and have the officer publicly apologize for unecessary force. if not you they’re making a big mistake because there are children watching and they won’t forget this . They are going to have a bad attitude towards the RPD and they will have communities against them. More folks will get handguns and defend themselves by any means necessary, if this continues. Then you will have a problem on your hands because not everybody will go get a gun legally to defend themselves. That is something to ponder RPD.

5. In the video you can plainly hear the officer state to Ms Hardaway to stay away from that – if he felt she was reaching for his gun then yeah the hit to the back of the head (NOT the face Lovely, not the face – sheesh woman and you are running for Mayor?? Get the facts right which you SAW in the video) was more than justified.

   I am one of the biggest detractor of the RPD – I have had several run ins with them – none of them overly positive that would allow me to “trust” the police – but in all cases I was compliant and they didn’t have to use the level of force needed for these 2 folks. Might not the fact that they RPD is called several times a month to the very address have played into this also??

   Bottom line – the individual who stated the video will not help Ms Hardaway is dead nuts on. She basically sunk herself with her behavior and non compliance. What is the name of the baby jesus was she thinking????

6. “I say this especially since the consequences of getting into even a relatively minor scuffle with the police are always severe, as I suppose they should be.”

   Let’s assume, for argument’s sake, there is a group of people that is targeted, and comes into frequent contact with the police. For this group, there is a constant threat of police intervention in their lives. Some of that contact inevitably escalates into “minor scuffles”.

   Set aside for a minute whether there should be frequent police intervention in their lives to begin with. Why is the “severe” response justified? Most people would say: (1) officer safety; and (2) forced compliance with the state. The response must be severe because we can’t risk our officers getting hurt and because no matter the circumstances, everyone must yield to police force.

   Officer safety is a non-issue. He was not in danger. He had the gun. If Officer Krull disengages- walks away- he would have been much less likely to be harmed.

   Clearly, it’s all based on the idea that everyone must comply with the police in all circumstances. I get it, from the privileged- from even the majority’s point of view- this seems reasonable. But it’s reasonable because it’s rare. It’s not going to happen to YOU. It certainly does not happen to me. For the vast majority of Monroe County, who will have no police confrontation other than the occasional speeding ticket, universal compliance is well accepted.

   But for that certain group of people, whose lives are deeply intertwined with the RPD solely based on the color of their skin and the neighborhood they live in, is full compliance ALWAYS reasonable? Their constant contact all but ensures “minor scuffles”, which according to you, justifies “severe” consequences. Under this regime, there WILL be “severe consequences” in the lives of the members of this group.

   Can you morally justify that outcome?

   The privileged class must be humble in its assessment of this case and the important policy implications. Remember that our value judgments are based on our experiences. And we have no monopoly on human experience. Have empathy for Ms. Hardaway,

7. David, I am white but I do live in a decidedly unprivileged area of the northeast quadrant which is about 80% black and which has a visible police presence. From my experience, and yes I’m not black but based on what I see with my eyes, it’s not actually the case that police are harassing city residents just for being black or for being out and about.

   Except when the police are explicitly called on, mostly they just seem to ride around in their cars. The only people I’ve seen the police routinely stepping out with are the groups that are dealing drugs on the corners, and even that is not done too aggressively. I’ve never seen anybody roughed up.

   There are a lot of burglaries and robberies that occur, and oftentimes police are searching for suspects based on a description, so I get it that for a young black person going about his business, perhaps he has had some negative experiences with the police. In this case let’s assume that the people weren’t actually fighting but were just verbally arguing, and the neighbor called the police out of an abundance of caution, falsely stating that they were fighting. Maybe it isn’t fair that an innocent person is sometimes suspected, but it doesn’t warrant or excuse screaming at cops, swinging on them, pulling out mace on them, or anything of that nature. For somebody to initiate a physical thing vs. the police and then claim to be the victim, it’s deluded – even if the police are trying to handcuff a person and they haven’t done anything wrong. But being belligerent with police is wrong and interfering with their work does warrant some response.

   The police do have important work to do and they are working in our interest, so in the occasion where a police officer asks for some of our time, most reasonable people will just automatically give it. To say that a whole neighborhood of people are experiencing routine police intervention in their lives, I just don’t see it. Believe me, police are not that overstaffed and mostly what they’re doing is responding to explicit calls for service and/or trying to solve real crime that’s actually just happened.

8. Daniel (and Lincoln),

   First, Lincoln your fine write-up contained a reference to “David” when I think you wanted “Daniel”.

   Daniel, you have a nice liberal academic perspective but do you have any relevant experience with the issues here?

   Having volunteered in north Rochester for a little over three years now (4 afternoons a week) I have gotten a feel for the terrain and with it the police’s perspective. I also commute there via bike. The crime threat there appears to be dominated by young African American males as it is in the immediate vicinity of the library (Maplewood) where I work. Assaults have been a significant problem. The library has had to call in the police to remove such people and I was there when an officer was injured by an arrestee. It is inherently difficult work for the police and I doubt PC idealizations are in any way helpful.

   The targeting you were refer to was covered in an August 2011 article in Scientific American entitled “How New York Beat Crime”. The principal victory of that aggressive policy was in reducing violent crime and in particular the deaths of “young men of color” (i.e., African American males). The trade-off of course is that many “young men of color” are stopped.

   The rationale for such an aggressive policy was also indirectly made in a frank emotive moment of the NYC mayoral campaign. Questioned about his support for “Stop and Frisk”, African American candidate Bill Thompson “thundered” back, “I’m the one who has to worry about my son getting shot on the street”.

9. Lincoln,
   Thank you for the thoughtful response. I guess the actual frequency of police intervention is something I’m not aware of. It’s interesting to hear your experience. I agree that there is good policing in this city and that meeting a police officer with aggression is always a bad choice. I would never do it.

   I still question why we assume the necessity for full compliance at all times, and why violence is absolutely justified. That’s a different question that I don’t think we ask enough.

10. Ted,

    Living within inner cities my entire life, including growing up in Rochester and graduating from the RCSD, is my relevant experience. As a member of the NYS bar, protecting the vulnerable from state power is my profession. My liberal academic background taught me that discussing these issues with others and trying to understand their experiences is necessary to forming my opinions.

    That said, this is really a thought experiment, not a question of fact. Justifying police violence isn’t a matter of crime statistics. It’s really more about how we value the intrusions into others’ lives. RPD doesn’t intrude on my life. The entire time I’ve lived in this city, I’ve only been approached by an RPD officer once. I was in highschool and having a rowdy house party. They asked me to send everyone home because neighbors were complaining. Then they left.

    But that’s not everyone’s experience. How can we say that a certain frequency of intrusion into someone else’s life is justified by OUR safety. Why is it OK for a certain group of people to bear the costs of public safety?

    Finally, the “they’ve got a tough job argument” is completely unhelpful. This is certainly not a discussion about fairness for the people EMPLOYED by RPD. They’re paid. They chose to be there. If they’re injured, they get paid time off or Workers’ Comp benefits. There are many people who are far more deserving of our sympathies and concerns than those gainfully employed by our municipal government.

11. Daniel,

    As I alluded to the principal beneficiary of the recent trend toward aggressive policing has been young African American males by reducing their deaths at the hands (or guns) of other young African American males. By the way in a recent piece by Mary Anna Towler she cited crime statistics. The significant one she didn’t comment on was the 21% – the percent of violent crime victims who were not African American but in which the perpetrator was African American.

    I could have similarly commented on living in “inner cities” but it is irrelevant. By working in a heavily populated hot spot – along Dewey Ave. – surrounded by many young people and regularly looking out on to the street scene there I get a feel for these issues that I never ever could come close to in living in the South Wedge.

    As a more particular example, last year after some nearby assaults (one of which led to an African American women suggesting I reconsider volunteering there due to the apparent targeting of white men) we had a meeting. The meeting was delayed a bit as a city official was late. As he walked in he said in passing, ‘I was late due to attending a meeting about assaults on immigrants’. No one at the meeting needed any more details.

    So the question left for you and others with similar “liberal academic backgrounds” is can you in any way be critical of those that you presume are “far more deserving of our sympathies”? For future reference if somehow I fall into this category then please forgo the sympathy or pity and just offer your honest critical opinion. Honesty can be productive, pity very rarely is.

12. Daniel, Ted and Lincoln,

    It seems to me that not considering how the incident started makes any discussion totally meaningless here. We know someone called the police. We know that when they arrived they didn’t actually witness a fight or a crime (otherwise they would have started with an arrest and not just questioning) because there would have been charges. It appears that the 16-year old, Romengeno Hardaway, asserted his rights (to speak #1, not to be questioned and not to allow the police onto his family’s property to question him) and the police did not like that. In my book that is usually “contempt of cop” which is not a legal offense. All people should be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights in my opinion no matter where they live or what they look like.

    What I interpret two of you saying is that it is OK to violate someone’s rights, especially a minority’s rights in a troubled neighborhood in order to ensure all our safety. Now we have not seen the police’s side of the story, but apparently they did come onto the family property despite not being allowed to do so. Is that really what you are advocating?

13. John R,

    I am not responding to this incident but to the underlying issue of police tactics. Those tactics were raised by Daniel and are big picture issues (unlike this incident).

    The pro and cons of those tactics were succinctly described in my earlier notes and did not reference “our safety”.

14. I strongly doubt that the trend toward aggressive policing is to the benefit of young black males and minority communities. Show me some studies that show anything like that and I’ll consider revising my views on this. The plain fact is that crime has been going down now for over 20 years and no one, not criminologists, sociologists, police chiefs or mayors can show that it is their policies and procedures (such as stop and frisk) that have achieved that result. They all want to take the credit, but to my knowledge so far there is no definitive causative link.

    I am as concerned by the tactics displayed here as by the possible unjustified arrest and the trend toward more “contempt of cop” arrests which is actually official oppression and profiling.

15. Daniel, I live on Selye Terrace. I know what it is like to have unruly neighbors who have no consideration of others. Their color does not matter, what matters is that I have to put up with loud noise from music, children screaming (my mother taught me not to bother neighbors as I played…politeness counts), vulgarities suh as the F and N words spewing loudly and inconsiderately while these neighbors conduct their fights right out in the open, cars parked on lawns as if we live in a ghetto, garbage dropped regularly on my lawn, my car rifled through – change stolen from it if I forget to lock it, I have to see more dirty laundry aired by some neighbors than I care to. I DON’T care what color someone is. What I DO care about is how their behavior affects me. So you might want to live here too, or other neighborhoods afflicted with similar problems, before trying out your sympathetic ideas.

Comments are closed.