Cal cops who jabbed students 'may' have done wrong OCCUPY

UC Berkeley police "may" have violated policies when they jabbed batons at defiant but peaceful students who set up their first Occupy encampment in November, says a tepidly worded report released Wednesday.

The strongest conclusion by the five-member Police Review Board chaired by UC Berkeley law Professor Jesse Choper is that authorities failed to follow recommendations from two prior Police Review Board reports that criticized the use of force during student protests in 2009 and 1997.

But the board's main charge from Chancellor Robert Birgeneau was to decide if police violated their own policies and "campus norms" during the Nov. 9 protest that lives today on YouTube videos gone viral and in the memories of angry students.

Rules broken?

The 36-page report describes police hitting students with batons and tells how officers threw students down and yanked them by the hair and neck. But it only hints at whether police broke rules as they enforced a campus rule against encampments.

For example, the report tells of an afternoon conflict when "many officers struck powerfully with their baton tips in rapid succession, strong enough to inflict injuries" against students who were "resistant to being moved, but not violent."

Did that break rules? The review board concludes only that the use of force "may well have been contrary to UCPD policies at the time." The fact that there was "no immediate threat to the safety of officers or others, or any active resistance" by protesters was "more plainly contrary" to campus principles, the report said.

In another example of the board's gentle handling of one of the most violent days in campus history is its conclusion about four officers who repeatedly struck three protesters huddled by some hedges: "The vigor of these baton thrusts is most distressing and should not be repeated."

Choper blamed the vagueness of the report that took six months to create on groupthink.

"After all, we were five people writing collectively," he said. "I'm afraid you're stuck with what we've written."

Birgeneau, who has apologized for his handling of the protest - he was in Asia trading e-mails with administrators about events - did so again in a statement that acknowledged the main message of the report.

"We truly regret that our processes were not adequate for dealing with the particular challenges of that day," Birgeneau said.

He noted, as does the report, that the campus has made policy changes since Nov. 9 that seem to be working, as evidenced by the lack of police force since then.

The changes are consistent with new recommendations for the entire 10 campus University of California system and call for a more patient, tolerant response to protests. They also call for improved communication and for alternatives to force if possible.

Escalating tensions

The Choper report notes that earlier review boards made similar recommendations - yet police still escalated tensions. For example, on Nov. 9, they brandished machine-gun-like weapons to shoot paint at fleeing protesters to mark them. Those weren't used, but an earlier report said the presence of such equipment would "needlessly provoke hostile reactions."

UC police did not respond to requests for comment.

Doctoral students Julie Klinger and Charlie Eaton said the report has no teeth.

"There are no punitive measures against people who made bad decisions," said Klinger, who said police threw her to the ground Nov. 9 and arrested her. She called for resignations.

"What we need," Eaton said, "is a commitment from UC that they won't increase tuition or use force on nonviolent protesters. This report doesn't give us either of those things."