UC Davis Agrees to Formally Apologize to Students and Implement Reforms
Ten months after the November 18, 2011, pepper spray incident, attorneys for 21 UC Davis students and recent alumni announced the details of their settlement with the university over a federal class-action lawsuit. The announcement comes two weeks after UC Regents approved the agreement and after the agreement was certified in US Federal Court.
“I want to make sure that nothing like this happens again. That’s the best thing that could come from this. Since November 18 students have been afraid of the police. The University still needs to work to rebuild students’ trust and this settlement is a step in the right direction,” said Fatima Sbeih, who just graduated with an International Studies degree. Sbeih was pepper sprayed on the Quad. She had panic attacks and frequent nightmares for months after the incident, and often woke up screaming.
“I want the University and the police to understand what they did wrong. Police should be accountable to students,” said Ian Lee, who will be a sophomore this year. Lee was less than two months into college when he was pepper sprayed last year. “I was demonstrating because of rising tuition hikes and privatization of the University. Then we faced police brutality in response. I felt like the University silenced me.” After the incident, Lee experienced panic attacks and was afraid to participate in protests.
The student plaintiffs who were pepper sprayed experienced excruciating effects. In some cases, the pain lasted for days. Like Fatima and Ian, many have experienced trauma since the incident. As a result, many students’ grades suffered.
The university’s response to seated student, non-violent protesters has been widely deemed unacceptable. A task force that the university created to investigate and analyze the response to the protestors concluded in an extensive report that “The pepper spraying incident that took place on November 18, 2011 should and could have been prevented,” and found culpability at all levels of the university administration and police force.
The settlement was filed today with the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, for review by a federal judge before it becomes final. The terms of the settlement include:
“UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi will issue a formal written apology to each of the students and recent alumni who was pepper sprayed or arrested.
“The University will pay $1 million as part of the settlement. This includes a total of $730,000 to the named plaintiffs and others who were arrested or pepper-sprayed on November 18. It will also include up to $250,000 in costs and attorney fees.
“The University will work with the ACLU as it develops new policies on student demonstrations, crowd management, and use of force to prevent anything like the November 18 pepper spray incident from ever happening again. $20,000 of the settlement will go to the ACLU for its future work with the University on these policies to protect free speech and free expression on campus.”
“The case has been expanded to a class action lawsuit to make sure that anyone who was pepper-sprayed or arrested that day can be part of the settlement, even if they are not a named plaintiff. $100,000 of the total award will be set aside to compensate other individuals who were pepper-sprayed or wrongfully arrested on November 18, 2011.”
“The University will also assist students whose academic performance was adversely affected by the incident in applying for academic records adjustment.”
“If the First Amendment means anything, it’s that you should be able to demonstrate without being afraid of police violence. What happened on November 18 was among the worst examples of police violence against student demonstrators that we’ve seen in a generation. The settlement should be a wake-up call for other universities and police departments,” said Michael Risher, staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California. “The early resolution to this lawsuit means that the students can begin the process of moving on and we can work with the University to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again at the University of California.” The ACLU-NC will use the attorneys’ fees awarded to it in the case to advocate for free speech rights and other fundamental civil liberties.
“Police should never have been called out to disperse the lawful protest against steep tuition increases, police brutality against UC Berkeley protesters, and privatization of the university,” said Mark E. Merin, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs. “The University never should have used police against peaceful protesters. Perhaps the economic costs of violating students’ First Amendment rights to free speech and free assembly will discourage similar abuse in the future,” Merin added.
The plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU of Northern California, Sacramento civil rights attorney Mark E. Merin of The Law Office of Mark E. Merin and Oakland attorney Meredith Wallis. ACLU-NC attorneys working on the suit include Michael Risher, Alan Schlosser, Linda Lye, Novella Coleman and legal fellow Lauren DeMartini.
The Vanguard will have additional interviews and analysis shortly.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
A nice pay day. There were those that tried to lead us to believe there wouldn’t be any monetary settlement. WRONG!!!!
What a crack up. They were protesting tuition hikes and they just added another million to the tab.
Here we see that all motivations boil down to the pursuit of self interest. Cooperation is only a means to that end.
Like I said, money talks and BS walks.
It’s not even a nice payday when split 21 ways.
“Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims alleged by Plaintiffs in the Litigation. Defendants contend that they acted reasonably and in good faith”
What exactly was the point if the defendants were not going to admit wrongdoing? And what is Katehi apologizing for if the officers get to maintain they acted reasonably?
You can pepper spray me anytime for $25,000.
correction…$35,000
Yes David. Very inconsistent and not satisfying. I don’t know what would make the horror of that day on our hometown go away, but this doesn’t appear to be it for me.
[i]You can pepper spray me anytime for $25,000[/i]
[i]correction…$35,000 [/i]
Rusty, you bring up a very good point.
What I we polled all these college students and asked the if they would let themself be sprayed with pepper spray for $35,000.
I’m guessing we would get about 60% takers.
But you guys are separating the physical act from the deprivation rights. This is not just about pepper spraying, it’s about students having the right to protest on campus without the police violently infringing upon it. How do you put a pricetag on freedom?
David:
“Given what I know about the student protesters involved on November 18 who were either arrested or pepper sprayed, I would be both very surprised and disappointed to learn in a few weeks when the settlement is made public that this was about money.
These are people very deeply devoted and committed to a cause for social justice. They are not operating to line their pocket books. When I spoke to them in February they were far more concerned with the university admitting to what happened, what went wrong, and taking steps to prevent a repeat, than they were about money.”
So what do you think now of the settlement?
I haven’t talked to the attorneys or the protesters yet, so I would like them to explain themselves, but I think you can read through my words that I’m not exactly happy with this settlement.
Here’s what I wrote on Facebook: “I don’t see the point of the settlement, they don’t get an admission of wrong doing, we haven’t learned anything new, and the money split 21 ways is not a lot of money.”
[i]But you guys are separating the physical act from the deprivation rights[/i]
Well ignoring for the moment the history of outrage that the “police used a weapon of military-grade pepperspray on those protestors”, we can just add to the polling:
[quote]For $35,000 I would be willing to give up my rights to protest on campus except in designated areas, and be pepper sprayed. Yes/No[/quote]
My guess is that you will still get about 60% of the students.
Jeff: It is after all easy to give up someone else’s rights.
Jeff:
“For $35,000 I would be willing to give up my rights to protest on campus except in designated areas, and be pepper sprayed. Yes/No”
Jeff, and don’t forget to add:
“The University will also assist students whose academic performance was adversely affected by the incident in applying for academic records adjustment.”
SWEEEEEEEET!!!!!
[i]It is after all easy to give up someone else’s rights.[/i]
David, that is a reasonable point. However I think that 60% would include the folks that tend to protest in unauthorized areas. And the 40% that would not vote to do this would likely include all the well-off children that would not value $35,000 as much since mommy and daddy already bought them a BMW.
Of course the only way to prove this is to have enough money to give away and execute a real poll with real results.
What it would likely prove is the overblown moral outrage over the “damage” caused by the pepper spray.
[i]”The University will also assist students whose academic performance was adversely affected by the incident in applying for academic records adjustment.” [/i]
Rusty, I think my two kids would let themselves be sprayed just for some extra academic support.
“What it would likely prove is the overblown moral outrage over the “damage” caused by the pepper spray.”
The moral outrage was not just based on the physical effects of the pepper spray, but I would suggest are greater than most are acknowledging given the quantity and strength of the dosage. Nevertheless I think it’s a false test to poll people.
It would be like asking someone if they would be willing to be hosed down by a fire hose and attacked by dogs for $30,000 versus the meaning of what it meant when Bull Connor actually did it to committed protesters attempting to achieve freedom and equality.
Jeff, I read that to mean that some of them will have their grades adjusted upwards. $35,000 and better grades….great work if you can find it. Where can I sign up. I’ll bet there are many bystanders from that day that now wish they had jumped in that line.
So far as we know right now, the plaintiffs did not get any verified evidence not already in the public realm about the chain of orders, communications, and reaching the highest levels of UCD management.
The Chancellor just paid $1 million to halt anyone getting the goods on her communications that day. She used tuition and taxpayer money to save her professional career.
Nice going, plaintiffs. Why’d you let her do it?
If I had been plaintiffs counsel, I would not have settled the case until I had her documents, and her deposition, minimum.
“It would be like asking someone if they would be willing to be hosed down by a fire hose and attacked by dogs for $30,000 versus the meaning of what it meant when Bull Connor actually did it to committed protesters attempting to achieve freedom and equality.”
Here we go……never fails
The callousness of these posts is nothing short of repulsive. What was done to the protesters was so wrong on so many levels. The monetary compensation is extremely modest and the fact that there does not appear to be any resolution on the University’s wrongdoing but that they will pay $1 million to try and make it all go away is classic. With the way they waste money, not to mention probably this is paid by some form of insurance, this is nothing to them.
OH, and I bet you would not get any takers at all for the voluntary exposure to this substance.
Like you David, I am terribly disappointed in this outcome. If this is the “final chapter” it is a sad story indeed. Forget “justice”, there was nothing learned here, even though there could have/should have been. Our legal system was used by all the players in exactly the ways we have come to expect, but we are left without the “healing” that the University said it wanted. Officer Pike is a pariah: a barely human meme without true humanity. No doubt the students continue to distrust the police and the police continue to regard students as spoiled brats. All this while the University “system” offers both an apology and denies wrongdoing.
The simple fact is that without a deliberate restorative process this is the only outcome we were likely to get. Although the Reynoso Task Force report called for the use of restorative justice principles and practices, none were ever considered (because the “legal system” used by ALL sides feels threatened by them). This, despite the fact that such principles and practices have helped and continue to help people scarred by such events as the Rwanda Genocide, the Liberian Civil War and the years of Apartheid in South Africa (and many other more local events) move beyond them to find healing and restoration.
It amazes me that in our legal sophisication we fail to use approaches that yield learning and “humanization” and allow true justice to be found. We are the poorer for this failure.
Robb, you said much of what I was was trying to say but much more constructively and eloquently.
“If I had been plaintiffs counsel, I would not have settled the case until I had her documents, and her deposition, minimum”
Apparently they have them. Unfortunately, it’s subject to the mediation agreement and therefore not public.
Spoke to a student and Michael Risher attorney for the ACLU. His point when I asked him to respond on the money issue is that $30,000 barely covers a year of tuition for the students and therefore he did not feel like this was just about money, though he did acknowledge that money was part of the equation – the stick to the university that making these decisions would be costly.
For the student I talked to, for him the loss of trust of the university and the police is a huge suffering. He has also suffered from anxiety attacks after wards.
Michael Risher emphasized the importance of allowing the ACLU to help set policies.
And apparently for some the personal apology from Katehi was meaningful, though Risher did acknowledge it was somewhat offset by the statement that avoids taking responsibility and their belief that their actions were reasonable.
I’ll write this up in the morning for a full story and have some additional analysis.
Robb:
” No doubt the students continue to distrust the police”
Almost verbatim what the student told me.
I wish we could revisit the restorative justice process. I’ll be fully on board if you wish to come back to the HRC.
David wrote:
> It’s not even a nice payday when split 21 ways.
The SF Chronicle says they will get “about $30,000” each, that is a “nice payday” in most people’s book (especially the roughly half of Americans that take home less than $30K after taxes after working all year)…
I’ll be interested to see if any (or all as David predicted) donate their $30K to charity or a cause they care about or just keep it (I’m betting that most will keep the cash)…
It sounds like most of the students are going to use it to pay for their tuition or pay down their student loan debt. $30,000 is hardly a dent.
[i]The simple fact is that without a deliberate restorative process this is the only outcome we were likely to get.[/i]
Robb, what would you envision as a “deliberate restorative” process or outcome? The police chief is gone. Pike is fired. Katehi was drug around in the mud for several months. The protestors got global attention. The university is paying $1M and enduring the participation with the UCLU to develop some SOP, or something similar.
I’m not sure what else everyone expects here. Should we frog-march Katehi to the guillotine? Should we fire the entire UCD police department and replace them with tie-die wearing hippies carrying water guns adorned with daisies?
What exactly would make everyone happy?
Jeff – It is not too late to engage in a restorative process–even now–if various sides agree to a face to face (or series of face-to-face) meetings. The intent of restorative justice (RJ) is NOT to parade anyone around. Indeed (and I can try to dig up a reference I wrote about how it might look (one idea) that I wrote for the Enterprise early on in this situation (I will send you a copy), it is designed to allow EVERYONE to talk together about the event affected them or caused them harm. The point is that Pike should have a chance to talk to the students about why he did what he did. He should also have the right to say to Katehi how her unwillingness to take his advice led to bad outcomes. Students should have a chance to share their story and explain what they were trying to do and what it meant to be pepper sprayed when they felt they were doing no wrong. Katehi should be honest with them about what motivated her to act as she did (she clearly bears scars from prior trauma related to experiences as a student in Greece). RJ process can enable these things to happen and then, perhaps, a discussion can occur about what the various sides need to deal with the harms they experienced.
All of these people have pieces of a story and a process that enables them to share their narrative and hear what others have to say CAN (it does not always) pave the way for restoration. These processes are useful because what the legal system provides (political cover, payouts, apologies) is, arguably, not what people most want and need in the face of these kinds of disruptions. The bottom line is that we have a situation now in which the mistrust continues, lives are ruined and nothing fundamentally changes. We can do better.
Ultimately, RJ focuses on having all actors in a given situation that leads to mistrust, anger, harms done come together to work together to move beyond it. It is not about making everyone “happy” in some abstract way, but it is about trying to find a way forward to right wrongs and make changes so such things will not be repeated. Look: if it can work in places like South Africa and Northern Uganda, (and in very interesting ways closer to home in Fresno County) it can work here. We simply lacked the leadership and willingness to take the risk to make it happen. We can talk about this when we meet Jeff (may need two meetings 😉
Jeff:
“I’m not sure what else everyone expects here. Should we frog-march Katehi to the guillotine? Should we fire the entire UCD police department and replace them with tie-die wearing hippies carrying water guns adorned with daisies?”
Jeff, I’m sitting here laughing out loud at the computer to where my wife is asking what’s up? I’ve got an idea, let’s replace the UCD Police with the soon to be unemployed stand-in NFL referees. They work cheap, are ineffective and can easily be intimidated by the student protesters.
In case people wanted to know how this gets paid. Steve Montiel, Media Relations Director at UCOP told me: “Any money paid as a result of the proposed settlement will from the university’s General Liability Risk Program, a self-insurance fund. UC collects premiums internally to fund its insurance programs. The rates are determined by external, independent actuaries, and they vary, depending on losses. Basically, the premiums cover costs.”
Robb – Thanks. Got it now. I agree that the process your outline could be restorative. I suppose there is also risk that the originating conflict is a symptom of other problems, and because of that, the process would not be so restorative. However, I think when you get people in a room face-to-face, there is usually a better chance to at least tone down the high emotions of the conflict. We make anger icons out of the virtual people involved in our conflicts until we meet them and realize “hey, they are human just like me!”
Let’s put this on the agenda to chat about. It might take coffee and then something stronger!
Rusty. Ha! I like your idea about those temp NFL refs. They are going to need a job after taking that game away from the Cheeseheads. In fact, I think they might need some extra security… so maybe that can be the job for the laidoff UCD police. I can’t beleive how mad the fans are… even the Seattle fans are pissed that their team was the beneficiary of such an obvious blown call.
The Obama State Department just announced that they blame the blown call on some YouTube video…
[quote]For $35,000 I would be willing to give up my rights to protest on campus except in designated areas, and be pepper sprayed. Yes/No[/quote]I have no idea what it would be like to be sprayed in the fashion that the protesters were. My response to the above question would be based on ignorance.
The most meaningful way to poll this would be to ask people [i]who have been pepper sprayed[/i] whether they would be willing to be sprayed [i]again[/i] for $35K, as they are the only ones qualified to respond meaningfully. I wonder what the result of [i]that[/i] poll would be?
[quote]What exactly would make everyone happy?[/quote]I don’t know, but it appears that we now know one thing that appears to make [i]no one[/i] happy.
$30K is cheap for what those cops did to those seated students.
And, the chain of command and internal, confidential emails are not being released.
And, we lack the depositions of the UCD chain of command, so there is no accountability.
Oh, but UCD has to agree to improvements? They would have had to later, after the public learned the facts from the internal documents and the UCD depositions.
All I can say is: plaintiffs and counsel blew it. UCD defense counsel were from my old firm, Porter, Scott, and all I can say is those are some really good lawyers over there at that Sacramento firm. Nancy and colleagues rolled the ACLU and those UCD students. And saved Katehi’s job.
Congratulations, ACLU.
Re: $30,000 per student:
Didn’t many or most of those pepper sprayed go to the emergency room for treatment? Very expensive; most insurance policies don’t pay for 100% of emergency room treatment.
Did any of those sprayed suffer any health effects beyond 1-2 weeks?
Did many of those pepper-sprayed hire their own legal counsel?
So assuming a few thousand dollars of medical bills and maybe a few thousand in legal counsel (outside of the class-action lawyers); this might put each student about $24,000 in the black after this incident.
Would I have myself pepper-sprayed for $24,000 in my student days?
Yes, for ordinary-grade pepper spray (negligible risk of long-term health impacts).
No for the military-grade pepper spray that was used in this incident; since with this extremely potent spray there is the risk of long-term adverse health problems, even if only low-level.
Actually, I would have settled for $30,000 only if I didn’t manifest any chronic health problems as a result of the spraying, and also under condition that if chronic problems did manifest in the future as a result of pepper spray exposure; UCD would be responsible for the health-care and associated costs.
[quote]Spoke to a student and Michael Risher attorney for the ACLU. His point when I asked him to respond on the money issue is that $30,000 barely covers a year of tuition for the students[/quote]
The tuition and fees this year for a California resident are $13,877. These people are either ignorant or liars.
Let me explain what really happened here: These people sold out. Rather than standing up for principles, they and the ACLU took the money and laughed all the way to the bank. I understand that they will have to go off campus to deposit their loot, since some of their buddies closed down the campus branch.
They sold out to the Man.
David wrote:
> Spoke to a student and Michael Risher attorney
> for the ACLU. His point when I asked him to
> respond on the money issue is that $30,000 barely
> covers a year of tuition for the students
Do the students that were sprayed go to Stanford Law School?
I just looked on line and found that tuition at UCD for 2012-13 is $13,877, so the $30K+ they got covers “close to the last three years of tuition” not “barely covers a year of tuition”…
I will be happy to admit I was wrong if you send even a few links to press releases of charities thanking the protesters for their $30K donations (I hope David will admit he was wrong if the protestors all keep the money or use it to buy a cool RVs and lots of Humboldt green bud for next year’s Burning Man)…
Yes, the $30,000 for tuition/fees is indeed misreported; according to a UCD website total costs (including tuition and fees, medical insurance, books and supplies, room and board, transportation) add up to about $30,000 for an in-state student.
I agree that $30,000 would definitely be and excessive settlement if ordinary civilian pepper-spray (such as women carry in their purses) had been used.
The fact that the extremely potent military-grade pepper spray was used is the important detail here, I think.
I would agree for a frenzied crowd of drug-crazed and enraged rioting protestors, you might want to deploy the military-grade pepper spray. But for a lower-key protest without any berserk or riotous behavior, such as the case with the UCD protestors, ordinary civilian-grade pepper spray would have been more than adequate for dispersing the crowd.
It’s my understanding that police are trained to use overwhelming force as a general arrest tactic in order to nip any resistance to arrest in the bud. However, I think a more nuanced approach is needed for peaceful protests. I guess I’m a bit worried to see the increasing use of military gear and tactics by the police; we certainly don’t want the police to be akin to a paramilitary force, do we? (exceptions when going up against gangsters with guns and assault weapons, and for wild violent riots).
“The tuition and fees this year for a California resident are $13,877. These people are either ignorant or liars.”
I think he meant tuition, housing, and expenses not purely tuition.
Blame this on me, here’s his actual quote:
“It’s also important to remember that first of all that $30,000 is not even a full year of tuition and expenses at Davis. The university’s own website said that [it’s] around $32,000 per year.”
[quote][/quote]Didn’t many or most of those pepper sprayed go to the emergency room for treatment? Very expensive; most insurance policies don’t pay for 100% of emergency room treatment.[quote][/quote]
The university already agreed to foot the student’s medical expenses bills related to the pepper spray incident
[quote][/quote]Did many of those pepper-sprayed hire their own legal counsel?[quote][/quote]
Given the very deep pockets of the university, there were probably a couple of busloads of attorneys lining up for the opportunity to represent the students on a contingency basis.
[quote][/quote]No for the military-grade pepper spray that was used in this incident; since with this extremely potent spray there is the risk of long-term adverse health problems, even if only low-level.[quote][/quote]
The effects of the pepper spray are over with in about 45-60 minutes even without any decontamination shower or anything else. All law enforcement pretty much uses the same grade of pepper spray and how this can be construed as some sort of “military grade” is beyond me.
wesley506,
I was able to find a link showing “police grade” pepper spray as 5.3 million Scoville units, as compared with civilian-grade pepper spray (available to general public) at 2.0 million Scoville units. Also I found references to “weapons-grade” pepper spray, but not “military-grade” pepper spray, except in press reports about the UCD incident.
I found another link stating that the MK-9 cannister used in the UCD incident has 0.7% to 1.3% Capaicinoid content; whereas 0.2% is authorized for tactical deployment (?)
Perhaps I’ve been misled by news reports about the UCD incident using the term “military grade” pepper spray; if so my bad for not doing due diligence.
Wesley, do you happen to have some more complete facts on pepper-spray grades?