It hearkened back to stories about the sixties and FBI infiltration into groups. The truth however, seems to be much more mundane, according not just to the UC Vice Chancellor involved, but also a member of the SAT.
Mr. Austin was the only juror who held out for acquittal in the second trial. By the third trial it became clear that Mr. Austin was right to be skeptical about the claims of the West Sacramento Police.
So when Mr. Austin tells me that the group is not taking lists of names and is not engaged in inappropriate activities, I am going to tend to believe him. Then I am going to tend to believe Vice Chancellor Griselda Castro when she represents that the SAT’s activities have been as a supportive role, and that what happened was that a March incident involving a UC Davis Police Officer got conflated with their activities.
Unlike Mr. Austin, UC Davis Police do not have a great history when it comes to dealing with student protesters.
Mr. Austin told the Vanguard earlier this week, “The police are NOT part of our volunteer team. We only contact them if we observe an illegal activity or if a student’s action might result in someone getting injured or killed.”
“One of our goals by being there is to reduce or eliminate the need for police presence, as quite often, they are seen as a threat by many students, especially when emotions are running high,” he said.
However, the police in the recent incident became aware of the protesters leaving campus and going to the Chancellor’s residence.
He said, “They, without contacting us, chose to send a plain-clothed officer there and when confronted about who she was and why she was there, she lied. Her lie was the catalyst that, in my opinion, created this level of mistrust between some of the students and staff/administration.”
He added, “That is totally understandable as it is very hard for anyone to trust someone who has lied to you.”
In fact, this is not the first problem with UC Davis police. Back in 2007, students had entered Mrak Hall protesting for the food service workers. At that time, the UC Police would arrest all of the protesters for trespassing, despite the fact that they were in a public building during business hours.
When a police officer was ordered to arrest the protesters, he refused, arguing that the arrest would be illegal. He was relieved of duty and subjected to discipline. However, he was correct and the DA was forced to throw out the charges against the arrested protesters.
In another incident that we have covered, Brienna Holmes was arrested for resisting arrest. However, when the case went to trial there seemed a huge discrepancy between the police account and what was seen on the video. The jury would hang and charges would be dropped.
The March incident is a bit chilling because it was so unnecessary. A plain-clothed police officer gained access to protesters by misrepresenting who she was. However, when the students figured out that she was a police officer, she should have been honest. Instead she lied to them.
Is this illegal? No. But what it did was undermine the trust of the students in the university, and the university knows it.
University Spokesperson Claudia Morain denies that there was an undercover officer and that this was an infiltration. She told the Vanguard yesterday, “The officer was in plain clothes and part of the police presence to ensure public safety.”
However, she did acknowledge that this was not handled as well as it should have been.
“This clearly has caused concern among some students and members of the community, and we can do better in the future,” Ms. Morain told the Vanguard. “Officers are going to identify themselves from now on, and they’ll either be in uniform or have a badge on their belts.”
One of our concerns moving forward is that there a whole host of problems with the leadership at the UC Davis Police Department. There are several pending lawsuits against them internally and now externally.
Police experts have pointed out to the Vanguard, at various times, that the University of California is hiring less-qualified officers. There is likely something to that, as what police officer would want to work at a university when the majority of calls are likely to be alcohol-related? In short, what police officer wants to be a party cop?
It is perhaps not fair to overgeneralize, however, but from our observations City of Davis police officers have been much more professional in their conduct than their university counterparts.
It alarms me that some readers have been willing to excuse this behavior by some of the UC Davis Police officers, based on the fact that there were students who have broken the law.
Our response to that is very simple. Two wrongs do not make it right. There are certainly legal ways to prevent students from doing dangerous things in the course of their protests.
We encourage the students and administration to have an open and honest dialogue. But the ability to do that has been harmed by the actions of Officer Johanna Zaconi. The University has taken the first step toward fixing that problem, as they have admitted that it was a problem and that they will do better in the future.
That is a good step, from a university often loath to admit mistakes. We must now move forward and hope that all sides can work together toward co-existence.
It is a tough time with the budget as it is, fees going up and classes more scarce. Everyone involved has to recognize, however, that they are in this together.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
[quote]“Mr. Austin was the only juror who held out for acquittal in the second trial….So when Mr. Austin tells me that the group is not taking lists of names and is not engaged in inappropriate activities, I am going to tend to believe him….Unlike Mr. Austin, UC Davis Police do not have a great history when it comes to dealing with student protesters.”[/quote] So, Mr. Austin’s jury votes provide him with credibility here that also extends to UCD authorities–and even give him “a great history…dealing with student protesters.” Did I miss something here?[quote]“It alarms me that some readers have been willing to excuse this behavior by some of the UC Davis Police officers, based on the fact that there were students who have broken the law. Our response to that is very simple. Two wrongs do not make it right. [b]There are certainly legal ways[/b] to prevent students from doing dangerous things in the course of their protests.”[/quote]And, what did the police do that was illegal? Somewhere I thought I read, “Is this illegal? No.”
And that reminds me: “…under the law they are allowed to do that provided they don’t actually [s]ask the seniors to vote yes[/s] violate protestors’ rights. That’s been my point from the start. You want to go after the [s]district[/s] UC Davis Police officers, but really you need to change the law. The [s]district[/s] UCD police acted within the law.”
To Just Saying: Great analysis! You took the words right out of my mouth!
dmg: “In fact, this is not the first problem with UC Davis police. Back in 2007, students had entered Mrak Hall protesting for the food service workers. At that time, the UC Police would arrest all of the protesters for trespassing, despite the fact that they were in a public building during business hours. When a police officer was ordered to arrest the protesters, he refused, arguing that the arrest would be illegal. He was relieved of duty and subjected to discipline. However, he was correct and the DA was forced to throw out the charges against the arrested protesters.”
From a Yolo County Press release, which has a different take on what happened from dmg’s spin that somehow the UC Police were at fault:
“No Charges Against UC Davis Protesters
Posted Date: 11/30/2009
Press Release
NO CHARGES AGAINST UC DAVIS PROTESTERS
DA Will Monitor Future Demonstrations
(Woodland, CA) – November 27, 2009 – Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig announced that no criminal charges will be filed against 51 individuals who were arrested by police for trespassing inside an administration building at UC Davis on November 19, 2009. The 51 individuals, mostly students, had gathered inside the administration building to protest recent fee hikes. They were arrested for trespassing after refusing to leave for several hours after normal closing time. University officials reported no property damage as a result of the protest, nor was there any report of violence or resistance among the 51 students arrested by police inside the building. District Attorney Jeff Reisig said, “Based on my discussions with Chancellor Katehi and Police Chief Spicuzza, the District Attorney’s Office will not be filing criminal charges at this time. While criminal charges may be filed for up to one year after the date of the alleged violation, it is our hope that future student demonstrations will comply with the law and eliminate any need for the District Attorney’s involvement at all.””
Elaine: Different incident. The one that you have posted refers to the November 2009 incident which occurred after business hours and therefore would be illegal. The one I am referring to is from May 2007.
dmg: “Elaine: Different incident. The one that you have posted refers to the November 2009 incident which occurred after business hours and therefore would be illegal. The one I am referring to is from May 2007.”
Sorry, got the wrong demonstration, so looked up the correct one. From Wikipedia, again a very different version of events that were not so “innocent” than the “peaceful” one described above:
“May Day
UCD May 1, 2007: Day of Action. May Day (May 1st) 2007 was the biggest protest in Davis recent history. The community demanded very clearly – UC Jobs! Twenty-four people, including members of SOC, were arrested for civil disobedience when they blocked the intersection of La Rue and Russell and refused to leave. Marchers later forced a meeting with UCD administrators, who promised to meet with SOC to resolve the issue in the next week. However, the UCD administrators failed to uphold this promise.
Those who were arrested later complained that they were being prosecuted and sought legal remedy by trying to prove there was a conspiracy by the Administration, University Police, Davis Police and District Attorney. Apparently they expected to be arrested, but not to be charged.
Chancellor’s Brown Bag Crashed
May 3, 2007. The Chancellor’s Brown Bag meeting was crashed by protesters. Though these quarterly meetings are supposedly designed to facilitate communication between the chancellor and the campus proceeding, the chancellor canceled the meeting rather than dialogue with the protesters. An alternate analysis of what happened is that the protesters would not allow the meeting to proceed, and the meeting needed to be canceled as a result. Chancellor Vanderhoef later put out a statement of the remarks he intended to make, had he been allowed to speak.
Sit-in at Mrak
May 23, 2007. After the university administration’s repeated failures to uphold its promise of a meeting with organizers, protesters forced a meeting by taking over Mrak Hall. Fifteen community members, including UCD workers, undergraduate students, graduate students, alums, and local labor leaders, were arrested after taking over the second floor conference room and staging a sit-in in the first floor lobby. A joint protest outside the building kept the pressure high.
Sodexho Workers and Supporters March on Mrak Hall; Mrak Hall Locked Down
Meeting with Chancellor Vanderhoef
June 5, 2007. For the first time, Chancellor Vanderhoef met with students and workers about this campaign. However, Vanderhoef declined to meet the demands of contracted-out workers to become university employees, with affordable healthcare and union representation. Furthermore, the UCD student newspaper, the California Aggie failed to report on the meeting, claiming it was “not newsworthy”. This left the reporting up to The People’s Vanguard of Davis (article here) and the UC Jobs Now! Editorial Board, which inserted a report into June 6th’s Aggie. Actions for workers’ rights will continue.”
[quote]“From Wikipedia, again a very different version of events that were not so “innocent” than the “peaceful” one described above: “[/quote] Please provide a link, Elaine. I searched for this entry several ways, but couldn’t find it. I’m no Wikipedia expert, but the language sounds like something that would carry a bunch of Wikipedia labels re. report bias and source questions.
The problem here is not the UC Davis Police.
Nor is the problem the one officer who lied to students about her identity.
The problem is the team itself.
I should stress that I do not mean to say the individual UC Davis staffers who compose the team are the problem – they are not.
The problem is the administration which controls the team.
While all of us recognize the actions of Officer Zaconi (lying to students) were wrong, I would like to point out that the administration had this team going for nine months before the students discovered it and broke the news. This shows a lack of respect for the students, and I think it’s the same as lying to them.
Since the students broke the news (about a month ago) people like Claudia Morain (from the UC Davis News Service) have been offering nothing but spin in order to put the people who made this team into the best possible light.
She and Vice Chancellor Castro argue that this team was meant to support student speech.
Meaning that the administration secretly built a team to support students who choose to speak out against the actions of the administration.
That, of course, defies logic. I wonder if the students feel supported by this team? I wonder if the administration ever thought to ask the students if they would like such a team?
Also there has been a rumor going around various comments sections that the police were not involved with the team.
That rumor is false.
The released documents clearly show that UC Davis Police Chief Spicuzza helped put this team together and was in constant contact with the people running the team.
The staffers who volunteered for the team likely did not know that the team was put together in consultation with the police force, and I do not mean to say that undercover police officers were part of the team. Yet to say that the police were not involved with the team is not true.
And to assign all the blame to Officer Zaconi misses the bigger picture of a public university lying to and keeping secrets from its staff, students, and the community, and tirelessly spinning any news stories that do come to light.
I’ll end by quoting University of California President Mark Yudof, from his book When Government Speaks:
“The obvious danger is that government persuaders will come to disrespect citizens and their role of ultimate decider, and manipulate them by communicating only what makes them accede to government’s plans, policies, and goals. The opportunities for such abuse are numerous.”
“Governments have an almost unique capacity to acquire and disseminate information in the modern state. This stems in part simply from superior resources – government has the personnel, the computer banks, and the interest in the current state of affairs to accumulate and disseminate information. . . . But informed debate is impossible if government operates in secrecy or reveals only selected facts and opinions.”