Connect with us

Exclusive Interview: UC Davis Protestor Eyewitness Account Of Police Pepper Spraying

Published

on

The pepper spraying by police of about a dozen University of California, Davis, students Friday afternoon has become an iconic example of police brutality and discrimination against not only the Occupy Wall Street movement by local and state officials, but against the very constitutional rights police and the elected officials they serve are paid to protect.

The New Civil Rights Movement contacted a UC Davis Department of History graduate student who was part of Friday’s protest. While the student, Robin Marie Averbeck, was not directly pepper sprayed, she says she and a friend “were close enough to catch some blow back from the spray and were coughing for a minute or two, but we recovered quickly.”

We asked Robin Marie Averbeck several questions via email, and asked her to share with us in her own words as many details as possible. Initially we had planned to only use selected quotes from Averbeck’s statement, but we find her comments so powerful, credible, honest, and passionate, we are presenting her statement here, below, in full, and unedited except for clarification. We have highlighted in bold a few of her more poignant and critical comments.

Averbeck, and all the students who participated in last week’s protests at UC Davis are heroes. Their non-violent actions have changed the conversation in America, and highlighted the paramilitary forces our police departments have become.

Stay tuned today for more stories about the UC Davis attack.

 

Hi David –

First I’ll just give you a rundown of my involvement. I showed up at the Occupy UC Davis campus around 2:15, when it was just the 30 or so campers and maybe a dozen other people who have been participating in the student movement – which would describe me; I’ve been participating in all the events this past week but I was not one of the campers. (I have to warn you I do not feel confident with my ability to gage the number of people in any assembly, so I would try to get second confirmations on my numbers if you can. I will talk to some of my other friends in the department tonight to see if anyone else is interested in commenting.) I was there when the police showed up at 2:30 to remind the Occupiers that the Chancellor told them to leave by 3:00, and I along with some other students went to the MU [Memorial Union, which is the main eatery/student center on campus] to announce to the students inside that the cops were coming and to encourage them to come out and support us.

When they started arriving, we took all the tents and put them at the center of the quad, and linked arms around them forming a circle. At this point there were probably 50 of us who had gathered by then. The riot cops (which I have heard the number to be 50; I’m not sure if it was that high but it was at least 25 that first arrived on the horizon) took a while to observe this (maybe 5, 10 minutes at most) but then began breaking through the chain and making arrests. At this point the line clumped into little clusters and we remained holding hands and sat down. The other tents that the cops had not gotten to were also taken down quickly by other occupiers; so it is worth noting that the official request of the Chancellor, that the tents be taken down, was already quickly accomplished and therefore all we were then doing was standing our ground.

While we chanted and refused to move, some other students who had gathered in the large crowd of spectators that had gathered around began joining us in the clusters that were refusing to move.

I have to say that this is one of the most inspiring things I’ve ever seen – because all of us already there had already committed to the movement, already committed to the possibility that we would be arrested or brutalized in some fashion. However these were students who were previously uninvolved – who were sitting there finally realizing that the Occupy movement, the student movement against the privatization of their university, and a police state that represses its own politically conscious citizenry all meant something to them, is real and has real consequences to them and their friends. Seeing someone at the moment that their apathy finally melts away is a beautiful sight to behold, and that day alone made it a proud day for UC Davis.

I would say that at least 12, perhaps as many as 20 students joined us there; it might have been more, actually, but I’d prefer to be conservative in my estimate.

A few minutes later we decided through People’s Mic to form a circle around the students that had been arrested, which resulted in the circle you see in the pepper spraying video. Those of us in the linked-arm circle were all sitting down. I was on the lower left side of the circle, maybe 15-20 feet from the students who got sprayed. Before the spraying started, students were chanting various chants, from “You are, we are, the 99 percent” to “Cops Off Campus” and “Books not Batons.” One person even used People’s Mic to announce that he had found a beanie, so whoever had lost it should come talk to him; it was inspiring and everyone was feeling the solidarity, at least I know I was.

There was about 10-15 minutes of this I think – this is the situation I supposed the cops felt they were cornered or threatened, and yes, that is absurd. At no point did we threaten [the police] or refuse to let them leave – in fact, before the pepper spraying started my friend, who was immediately to my left in linked arms, used People’s Mic to demand that they leave – another girl in the circle asked to amend that to we politely ask them to leave! So they could have left at any time – as you see in the video, we were all sitting down, so to claim we were somehow obstructing them is beyond absurd, it is clearly a lie.

So it was in the midst of this situation, which lasted probably about 15 minutes from when we sat in the circle that you see in the video, that I looked over my shoulder and saw the huge cloud of orange dust as the students were being sprayed right in front of me. In all honesty, I was shocked and horrified – I almost started crying on the spot. I don’t know why I was so surprised – it seems naïve of me – but it is really something different seeing this in person. I and a friend to my right were close enough to catch some blow back from the spray and were coughing for a minute or two, but we recovered quickly. After a minute or two of continuing to sit, the students got up as the riot police backed away, realizing that the pepper spray had failed to disperse the crowd, and we chanted as we approached them very slowly, mostly chanting “Shame on you.” It was at this point I figure that they realized there was nothing else to be done to disperse the crowd and they left, along with the students they had arrested.

More than anything else, I would say that what stood out to me was first, how horrifying it was to see this in person, and second, how it only increased the determination amongst the students. I can speak for myself that once I saw those students getting sprayed I was even more determined than I was before not to budge in the face of violence; I actually thought for a minute that the cops would just continue spraying around the circle, so I started bracing myself to be sprayed, because there was no way in hell I was going to be intimidated by that kind of violence, especially not after seeing my fellow students brutalized like that and how bravely and stoic they remained in the face of it. It was also beautiful to see everyone coordinating afterwards to get help for the students sprayed, and the students themselves comported themselves with great dignity.

I do not know if any counseling is being offered for the students sprayed; all in all this took about an hour and a half, from when the cops first started showing up on the horizon to when the students reassembled for a general assembly after they had been shamed off the campus.

Feel free to use my full name – Robin Marie Averbeck – and that I am a graduate student in the Department of History at UC Davis.

Best, much thanks,

Robin Marie Averbeck

 

For more on the UC Davis pepper spraying attack, see all our UC Davis stories here, including:

Watch: Shocking Video Of Police Pepper Spraying UC Davis Students

 

UC Davis Professor Demands Chancellor Resign Over Pepper Spraying Of Students

UC Davis: New Video Surfaces Of Police Pepper Spraying Passive Students

UC Davis Pepper Spray Attack Of Students By Police: What Questions Do We Need Answered?

 

 

(Image)

 

 

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

2 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

5 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

7 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.