
ACLU sues Minnesota for police violence against the press - soraminazuki
https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/police-are-attacking-journalists-at-protests-were-suing/
======
zucker42
I read through the whole complaint and it's a pretty shocking catalog of abuse
of power, discretion, and force. And it only covers actions against
journalists, and only in the city of Minneapolis.

~~~
colllectorof
It shouldn't be shocking for anyone who was paying attention. There is a good
book about related issues by Radley Balco called Rise of the Warrior Cop.
Published in 2013. Unlike many comments here and on other websites it's not
hysterical, or hyperbolic or contaminated with self-referential post-modernist
bullshit. It is a sober and factual analysis of how American police became
what it is right now. It's not an easy read, but it's a must-read for anyone
who wants to have a reasonable picture of the problem.

The public notion of good policing and the actual practices police departments
follow have been diverging for several decades (if they ever converged). What
we're seeing right now is not some inexplicable increase in bad behavior or
cops deliberately targeting journalists. For modern American police this is
just business as usual, except the volume of deployment is significantly
higher than in the past few decades and the visibility is much higher as well.

Edit:

There is a flip side to this coin. When you have a systemic problem of this
scale, you should be cautious about making simplistic (especially moral)
judgements about individuals in the system. When someone's training,
incentives, position in the community and even equipment nudge them towards
bad actions, even decent people will routinely do bad things.

~~~
zucker42
Don't get me wrong, I understand police violence is a continuing problem, but
that doesn't make this instance of it less shocking.

As a meta note, I've noticed that people often respond to comments saying "I'm
shocked with a recent occurrence of X" with "X has always been bad and been
happening for a long time" and in my opinion that response only serves to
desensitize people to the bad thing.

~~~
noobermin
I'm also tired of the "X has always been bad and been happening for a long
time." While I think some people mean it to highlight how prevalent a problem
is, it often comes across (or is in fact intended to be) a way to both virtue
signal and put down people who are less informed.

------
zargon
I fully support the ACLU in these lawsuits. However, their last paragraph
states "If the government refuses to hold its officers accountable for their
unlawful actions, we will." But suing the state doesn't result in
accountability for the officers. It punishes the taxpayers. The perpetrators
of these crimes never see any fallout from them. If we want real change,
police officers have to experience personal consequences for their actions.

~~~
rayiner
Punishing the taxpayers is fine. At the end of the day, they’re the ones who
elect the officials who hire the police chiefs.

~~~
raincom
In today's interview with Times, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said he doesn't
have power to change police union contracts. So, something rotten out there.
Best option for Minneapolis is to disband the police force just like Camden,
NJ did. For more, check [https://www.startribune.com/here-s-why-cops-can-t-be-
held-ac...](https://www.startribune.com/here-s-why-cops-can-t-be-held-
accountable/570998142/)

~~~
MertsA
>Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said he doesn't have power to change police
union contracts.

At this point screw the fallout from the police union. Rip it up and
renegotiate if the existing contractual obligations are too restricting.
Realistically whatever recourse the union might have for breach of contract
would be worth it. The most damaging action they could take would be to
strike, and if they did public support would be against the police at this
point and that would be a boon to appeasing the protesters. Heck, make it a PR
stunt and start a campaign to get protesters to enroll in the police academy
and fix the injustices they're marching for.

Either the PD gets replaced wholesale and the union can pound sand and the
protesters are appeased or the union comes back to the table to come up with a
reasonable deal that lets the municipality make some real changes to appease
the protesters. Regardless of how they proceed serious accountability is
crucial.

------
megous
It's like Lysander Spooner was onto something with his pamphlet "No Treason".
State representatives mentioned in the brief are barely distinguishable from
highway robbers. The swearing language, the lack of care for any legal basis
for their actions, baseless physical attacks, like shooting harmless people
with rubber bullets, the attitude, etc.

------
jedberg
In case you agree and want to help with money:

[https://action.aclu.org/give/now](https://action.aclu.org/give/now)

~~~
myself248
Is there a way to give anonymously, such that I won't get spam from other
charities who found out I gave to this one?

I don't know if the ACLU does that, but literally every other charity I've
ever given to has, and I value my data more than that.

~~~
greyface-
When you donate through a donor-advised fund[1], you have the option to make
the donation anonymous to the recipient organization (but presumably not to
financial surveillance systems and the IRS). Caveats: this only works for
501(c)(3) organizations, and DAFs often have donation minimums.

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donor-
advised_fund](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donor-advised_fund)

~~~
dpeck
A friend of mine has a startup around something like a DAF for everyone.
[https://www.charityvest.org](https://www.charityvest.org)

I don't have any association with the company other than knowing the founders.
No endorsement other than that they're good folks who want to help people have
an easier time giving.

------
r0m4n0
We are well past the point of being capable of recording all police
interactions with video. If every police officer was forced to record all
activity with body cams (that would be made public through some process) we
could scrutinize and hold every interaction accountable by the laws that
already exist. That wouldn’t solve everything immediately but I think over
time every action would take place as if there was public oversight.

Even during these protests we have instances of people being shot by the
police and conflicted recollections from both sides of the events that took
place.

[https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-
mcatee-police-say-videos-show-louisville-man-fired-gun/3133406001/)

Record everything and hold everyone accountable for their own actions.

------
mehrdadn
Man, this seems like such an uphill battle. I feel like unless they can show
police were trying to deliberately target the press rather than just treating
them like any other members of the public, they'll have that much more
difficult of a time getting past qualified immunity and winning a lawsuit.

~~~
TallGuyShort
I agree with you this probably won't be easy. But the video of the CNN arrest
is quite damning in my non-lawyer opinion. They had press credentials. They
clearly and calmly identify themselves as press. They clearly and calmly state
that they will move back to wherever the police want them. They are arrested 1
by 1 over the course of several minutes.

~~~
anewdirection
The CNN arrest was not violent, not were they held long. The reporter later
said everyone was nice, and they had orders to arrest anyone in the path of
the crowd who did not immediately disperse. If there is an example of the
police acting badly, or treating press differently, this is not it.

~~~
thephyber
Unfortunately, I don't think this comment should be voted down. I suspect it's
exactly the orders police are given when the order to disperse a crowd/protest
is given.

~~~
colejohnson66
It’s downvoted because it’s arguing that because the arrest was short and not
violent, it’s ok. That’s not how the law works; An unlawful arrest is an
unlawful arrest.

~~~
mehrdadn
They were _not_ saying "it's ok". Those words are getting put into their mouth
by other people. They were saying it's not an example of "police violence",
which was the allegation in the lawsuit.

------
fallingfrog
I’m pretty sure the problem of police abusing their power is never going away,
so long as we have policing in its current form rather than some sort of
unarmed or lightly armed community helpers. The reason they are always
equipped with lethal weapons and so quick to use them is that their role is
mostly to protect the people who have property from the people who don’t. And
in America that’s always going to have a racial element. Black people in
America are mostly still used as cheap labor- human capital stock. Unless they
are willing to start redistributing wealth away from the super wealthy towards
the least wealthy the ruling strata will always have to use violence to
maintain order. And that means journalists too.

That is why if you want to highlight who is holding the real power and address
the issues of inequality, the best place to start is to attack the police
directly. Because it’s something that they are structurally unable to fix
without fixing a whole bunch of other stuff first, and it places the focus
right in the center of where the violence is coming from. It forces a
confrontation by making a demand that they cannot ignore but also cannot
actually address.

~~~
smileysteve
> I'm pretty sure the problem of police abusing their power is never going
> away

The next handful of years is going to be interesting. Between civil
forfeiture, marijuana decriminalization, self driving cars (and for the
shorter term, coronavirus reduced driving) - police departments will be losing
a significant amount of their current income streams; especially if
unemployment returns back to its lows.

Everybody looks at automation in the food or retail industries; or health
administration and insurance; but we have a police and prison system designed
with illegal marijuana; that could shrink to 1/8th of it's size with
relatively few changes in laws (drug law repeal, mandatory minimums, crime
act).

~~~
a_puppy
> we have a police and prison system designed with illegal marijuana; that
> could shrink to 1/8th of it's size with relatively few changes in laws (drug
> law repeal, mandatory minimums, crime act)

Really?

Only about 18% of current prisoners (state and federal) are serving time for
drug offenses. [1]

Of federal prisoners serving time for drug offenses, only 12% are primarily
about marijuana. (54% are cocaine and 24% are meth.) [2]

Only 14% of federal offenders were subject to a mandatory minimum sentence.
(About half of those were drug offenses, so this overlaps heavily with the 18%
figure above.) [3]

No realistic minor changes could reduce the prison system to 1/8 of its size.
51% of prisoners are serving time for violent offenses. In fact, 14% of
prisoners are serving time for homicide alone, and a similar number for rape.
[4] So if you decriminalized _every_ crime except homicide and rape, and cut
the sentences for homicide and rape in _half_, then the prison system would be
1/8 of its current size.

I am optimistic that the USA could eventually, in the very long term, reduce
the prison system to 1/8 of its size. Fifty years ago, the prison system was
1/4 its current size. [5] Most western European countries have between 1/8 and
1/4 the US incarceration rate, and a few have below 1/8\. [6] But this will
require way, way, way bigger societal changes than just marijuana
decriminalization or other minor tweaks.

[1] Source is
[https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6846](https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6846).
Of the 1.274M state prisoners, 14% are serving time for drug offenses. Of the
162k federal prisoners, 47% are serving time for drug offenses.

[2] Source is
[https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dofp12.pdf](https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dofp12.pdf).
Caveat: this is federal-only, and federal prison statistics are often
different from state prison statistics.

[3] Source is [https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-
pu...](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-
publications/quick-facts/Quick_Facts_Mand_Mins_FY15.pdf). Caveat: this is
federal-only, and federal prison statistics are often different from state
prison statistics.

[4] Source is
[https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6846](https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6846)
again. Of the 1.274M state prisoners, 56% are serving time for violent
offenses (16% for homicide). Of the 162k federal prisoners, 8% are serving
time for violent offenses (2% for homicide).

[5]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States)

[6] [https://www.statista.com/statistics/957501/incarceration-
rat...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/957501/incarceration-rate-in-
europe/)

------
c3534l
Just earlier this month, protestors a stat over adorned rifles and threatened
the governor. This time, the police are ready to teargas and beat anyone for
any reason. The response doesn't seem the same. They've turned protests into
riots.

~~~
cutemonster
(is there a typo? What does: _" protestors a stat over adorned rifles"_ mean)

~~~
Fezzik
a stat(e) over, an adjacent State.

------
MBCook
As so many of these incidents have happened over the last few days it seems
like there should be a law that heightens the penalties when cops attack the
press compared to the current penalties.

~~~
leetcrew
I don't think the press should have special protections over ordinary
citizens. the penalty for _any_ unwarranted use of force should be increased
to whatever you would want for journalists.

~~~
dpeck
Yes!

Press is a thing people do, not a credential people have. All people should
have freedom to observe and report on (to the extent they wish or do not wish
to) actions of the state. Restricting that should have severe punishment.

~~~
ghouse
Agreed, though be careful what you ask for. If you're not a publisher (press),
you can't libel. Slander, sure. But libel, no.

~~~
leetcrew
IANAL, but it's my understanding that anything written and viewed by a third
party is considered "published" wrt libel. so it's already trivially easy for
an ordinary person to commit libel.

------
DoofusOfDeath
One thing I've never understood is how ACLU has legal standing to file many of
its suits.

I'm assuming that ACLU isn't claiming to be the injured party in suits like
this current one. Are they acting as attorneys for one of the alleged victims?

~~~
c0nsumer
Yes. Read the filing here: [https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/goyette-v-
city-minneapol...](https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/goyette-v-city-
minneapolis)

~~~
csnover
For anyone who doesn’t want to read the legal complaint, the named class
action plaintiff (Jared Goyette) was shot in the face by the police with a
“less lethal” round[0] and nearly permanently lost his eyesight[1] after he
had just finished reporting on a man who had been shot in the head by the
police with a “less lethal” round.[2]

[0]
[https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265786797650558976](https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265786797650558976)

[1]
[https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1266115234420400129](https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1266115234420400129)

[2]
[https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265779746153078793](https://twitter.com/JaredGoyette/status/1265779746153078793)

------
Attained
So what can anyone actually do to fix this? Protesting has no lasting effect,
and contacting my senator/politicians is a joke since I'm in the political
minority.

~~~
jonlucc
Protesting can have a lasting effect. There are small changes happening all
over the country already. In my city, the mayor has requested a total overhaul
of the police use of force policy within 14 days. In another city, the mayor
(who doesn't control the local police for weird reasons) has called an out-of-
cycle meeting of the police board to address poor behavior by officers during
the protests and to change policies. Over the past couple of nights, lots of
cities have changed how they deal with large protests, backing off; its too
soon to know if those tactical changes will revert in a week, a year, a month,
or at all.

At the federal level, there are a few bills being introduced to deal with
qualified immunity or other aspects that need addressing. These may not go
anywhere, but more pressure may have an effect on that. Also, hopefully next
time there's a massive economic downturn, officials remember that not
supporting individuals makes the whole nation a powder keg, ready to spawn
riots in all 50 states.

There's also historic precedent that protesting has a lasting change.

~~~
Attained
Thanks for the good information! I hadn't read up on Qualified Immunity.

It always seems hopeless though when my prejudiced neighbors think the
protestors are wrong and should be shot. These prejudiced people can be
police, lawyers, and judges. Even outside the justice system they clearly
perpetuate systemic issues.

------
eric_b
I'm interested to see what comes out of all this. I am very glad I do not live
in Minneapolis. I did not see a specific damages amount in the complaint, but
I am assuming it will be high, especially if granted class action status.
Bankrupting state and city police forces probably "feels" good to a lot of
people here. But what are the second and third order effects of underfunded
police departments?

In MN the Minneapolis city council wants to disband the police department
entirely. This may be all talk, and I'm not sure if it's technically possible,
but what happens if there is no police department? What are the second and
third order effects of that? Is having no law enforcement a better outcome for
the residents? My initial reaction is "no".

When confronted with videos of people rioting, looting and vandalising most
respond that "it's only a few bad apples, the vast majority are peaceful". Is
it not true that most cops are OK too? I'm honestly asking. Yes there are some
problem cops - Chauvin obviously having a long history of issues. But are we
really saying that the majority of cops are bad actors? It feels like with
emotions so hot right now, people are willing to throw the baby out with the
bathwater. I am skeptical that is the right course of action.

~~~
vertex-four
The problem is that the "good" police are incentivised to protect the "bad"
police, and do so. You're not going to find the "good" police investigating
and charging their colleagues - when it does happen, they're inevitably
harassed and removed from the force - and nobody else is in a position to do
so, so what you get is the "bad" police operating with impunity.

And there's effects on the wider system - courts will believe a police
officer's account of what happened pretty much no matter the opposing
evidence. There's no accountability when a police officer goes against the
reasons they were hired, and destroys people's lives.

There's the possibility of alternative systems of protection and justice,
which don't create organisations which are incentivised to protect murderers,
abusers, and rapists.

~~~
eric_b
What do some of those systems look like? Have any been tried on a large scale?
Are they effective? (Honestly asking, I am trying to imagine something other
than a police force - or that looks like a police force - that can effectively
deal with crime)

~~~
vertex-four
On a large scale, not really. It's very, very hard to change a society away
from being under the control of the police. On a smaller scale - yeah. There's
a lot of books on the subject of transformative justice, and various methods
are practiced in many many leftist spaces. I've been involved in some of it,
and it's worked from my perspective.

And simply _meeting people 's needs_ deters a lot of crime - nobody's going to
wind up in a position where they're robbing a gas station if they know, from
an early age, that they're going to be sheltered, well fed, and have a good
life, and this isn't dependent on massive amounts of luck, and if they fuck up
there's another chance.

------
dgzl
I think people are missing a few big points.

1) It's extremely difficult being a cop

2) It's extremely terrifying being a cop

3) It's extremely unpopular being a cop

It boggles me every time I hear people say cops need "stricter requirements"
and "less pay" but never hear anyone volunteering to join the force and make
real change. Look around, how many white knights want to be a cop?

The videos from Thursday/Friday night Minneapolis shape my framework for these
riots, not the supposed abuse to protesters and reporters. IMO, given the
circumstances, the cops overall have been very civil while taking an onslaught
of verbal and even physical abuse. And don't get me wrong, I'm not ignoring
police abuse and brutality.

[https://youtu.be/cHcELsLF7cg](https://youtu.be/cHcELsLF7cg)

~~~
aetimmes
I think you underestimate just how wildly the police will protect their
institution in defense of a perceived threat. Joining the force is not the
path to change; dissenters in the ranks get punished personally and
professionally in defense of the blue wall.

It's unpopular to be a cop because by and large, cops have a tremendous deal
of power (compared to an average citizen) and very little keeping them in
check.

With great power comes great responsibility, so the saying goes.

~~~
dgzl
I couldn't imagine someone being against a police Union and also supporting
civilian unions. They serve the same purpose. I also can't imagine a sane
person thinking we don't need the police, unless you're also supporting a
highly armed population (which, I am.)

> With great power comes great responsibility, so the saying goes.

So you acknowledge that it's difficult, terrifying, unpopular and requires
great reasonability, but offer nothing for a solution. What good is your
comment?

The police job is more stress than any content moderator on social media,
because the police are living the content that gets moderated. They're
subjected to immense violence because average citizens need protection from
criminals.

Once again, do you have any decent solution or do you plan to just add to the
stress of this critical and thankless job?

~~~
aetimmes
>I couldn't imagine someone being against a police Union and also supporting
civilian unions. They serve the same purpose.

My local electrician's union doesn't have dispensation from the state to
utilize lethal force on me or my family. Also, if I'm wronged by an
electrician in the course of their work, I can expect a fair result from the
justice system. The stakes are different.

>So you acknowledge that it's difficult, terrifying, unpopular and requires
great reasonability, but offer nothing for a solution.

You never asked for a solution. Your comment stated that the solution was to
join the force; I merely pointed out that your solution doesn't work. If you
want to shift the goalposts and put the burden of supplying the solution on
me, then I invite you to seek out and listen to some of the changes asked for
by the protesters - external checks and balances like citizen review boards
for PDs.

>Once again, do you have any decent solution or do you plan to just add to the
stress of this critical and thankless job?

Given how vocal the Blue Lives Matter crowd is, I'd hardly call being a police
officer thankless. There are plenty of people who still think/believe that
cops are infallible, shining knights of justice who can do no wrong, and if
they do, well, that person had it coming anyway.

~~~
dgzl
Literally nobody is trying to stop the protesters. Literally nobody. I can't
find anyone who doesn't agree that George was murdered. Hell, I have old
seemingly racist family members who agree with that. It's the arsonist,
rioters and murderers who are empowered by this new Anarchy Trojan Horse that
we're trying to stop, and we will succeed. If you can't see that difference
then you'll be blind during this insurrection.

------
mrfusion
Wouldn’t this just be a regular lawsuit? Why do you need the ACLU?

~~~
travmatt
Because the ACLU has a professed interest in defending freedom of the press?

~~~
coffeefirst
And a full-time staff that specializes in this sort of thing.

------
yters
At least from the video, the press is walking into zones of active conflict
between protestors and police with lots of noise and police in full riot gear.
Personally, it is not super suprising to me the press gets caught in the cross
fire.

~~~
bigiain
I note there's no widely circulating videos or reports of journalists being
assaulted by demonstrators...

I suspect there's way less "cross" in that "cross fire" than the term you're
using implies.

~~~
yters
Yes, journalists would be considered to be one of the demonstrators by both
parties. They are not geared out like the riot police, so do not look similar.

~~~
bigiain
At the same time, it's inconceivable that a journalist could be mistaken for a
rioting, window breaking, projectile throwing looter.

Which says something important about where the riot-gear-clad police are
aiming their "cross fire". (And hence why the protests are needed, and why
some of the protesters become violent after a few generations of the same old
same old...)

~~~
yters
yes, i am not saying police are justified

but it isn't clear at least from the video, police are going out of their way
to shut down the press, as in they have a press vendetta or want to censor

which is the impression i got was going on based on the headline and linked
article

i accept i may just lack reading comprehension

