Talk:List of cases of police brutality by date/Archive 1

Archive 1

Sequence

Perhaps a list in chronological order would also be appropriate. - TheSun 05:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I like that idea better than the alphabetical list. It would provide a more historical view. --Ginkgo100^talk 22:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

US-centric

This impressive list is, at its current state, very US-centric. I'm sure that police forces in other countries have about the same degree of brutality, but somehow their incidents are not as well documented. -- Gabi S. 17:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Carol Anne Gotbaum

I think we should begin a discussion: was her death, in police custody, an instance of police brutality? Dogru144 00:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The general consensus for inclusion here is that a case has to involve either court convictions of officers, or widespread acceptance that the case was one of brutality (such as with Stephen Biko). Cases under investigation are listed separately with a disclaimer. From the link you posted, there is no real evidence that it was brutality, and furthermore, the source is a blog, which is not considered very reliable. I am removing the entry. --Ginkgo100^talk 21:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Randdogs030198.jpg

Image:Randdogs030198.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed.--Tegestologist 01:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cardenas-YouTube.jpg

Image:Cardenas-YouTube.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok - images now include detailed fair use rationale.

Speaking of images, more of them would give this page added impact. At the moment it seems pretty text-heavy... --Voola 02:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Templates fixed.--Tegestologist 02:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The Taser Incident at Vancouver Intl. Airport

I think it is reasonable and academically responsible to await further information on the incident, specifically on the conclusions of the several reviews and inquiries currently taking place, before arbitrarily labeling this as an example of police "brutality". While the video shows the administration of the CEW, it does not clearly show the disputant's actions directly before the device is deployed, and thus a firm conclusion cannot be made that this was an example of police "brutality". Also, I removed the "tasered to death" line in the picture caption, as the Coroner's Report did not indicate the taser was responsible for Dziekański's death. RCMP also deployed the taser once, and administered two pulses, based on video evidence.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.249.42 (talk) 05:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You are entirely right: That one apparently slipped through the cracks. Cases still under investigation must go under the "Pending investigations" header per WP:BLP and previous consensus here. Also, I removed another one which admitted no charges were brought against the officer involved and which cited only a YouTube video. --Ginkgo100^talk 23:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The RCMP response in the Vancouver incident has resulted in broad and scathing criticism in the Canadian media and from the Canadian public in general. The government of British Colombia has already officially apologized, and the government of Poland is applying diplomatic pressure to ensure that everything is done to convict those responsible. There are ongoing investigations, and these will continue for months, and following these, criminal and civil proceedings will likely proceed for years. However it is clear that virtually all the Canadian media and the vast majority of public observers agree that this is a case of police brutality. Inclusion policy was discussed previously in the Police brutality article discussion section (where this list was formerly included), but it merits repeating: the final criterion for inclusion in the main list of incidents is not whether there are ongoing investigations or whether there have been convictions, but rather, a whether there is a "wide consensus among commentators". And this is quite reasonable, because investigations can be made to drag on forever and there are often (usually, I would say, regretfully) no convictions in the most blatant cases of police brutality. Investigations do not decide whether brutality occured; rather, they decide whether there legal repercussions or systemic changes will happen in consequence. The investigations section here is nevertheless useful in cases where there is not a clear consensus on whether brutality occured. But again, there is no reasonable doubt that it did in this case.

As for the number of taser zaps that Dziekański was subjected to, reports from non-police witnesses point to at least three and probably four jolts. The only report suggesting two zaps was the initial police report (which has been shown to be faulty in other regards). And the idea that Dziekański's death may have been unassociated with the taser jolts is simply willful misrepresentation. The man appeared lifeless almost immediately after being tasered and was officially pronounced dead about fifteen minutes later when paramedics arrived. Let's try to keep the discussions in the realm of the realistic and not that of hypothetical obscurantism.--BuffaloBilly (talk) 12:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Incident at Ronald Reagan Airport-Incorrect or Misleading Date.

The first incident on the list, of the young woman at the Reagan airport, purports to have happened on July 11, 2008. The times tamp on the YouTube video that incident links to clearly reads "2/25/07." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjemery (talk • contribs) 17:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to this article

Please see the centralized discussion of proposed changes to this article at Talk:Police brutality. --Ginkgo100^talk 16:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

There are at least 53 cases of police brutality in Chattanooga, Tennessee. There is a case of Wadie Suttles, Sr., a partially disabled WWII veteran who was beaten by the police. The case was investigated by the FBI then promptly thrown out. The FBI admitted that this was a homicide case but refused to investigate further. They then released more than 300 pages of blacked out information to the community. It was later discovered that the FBI had named the person who killed Mr. Suttles but promptly turned the case over to the City of Chattanooga, who refused to investigate farther. I don't know if any of the other cases in Chattanooga were investigated by the FBI, but this one was.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.50.81 (talk) 23:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

27th G8 summit

It says that an ongoing trial is "expected to conclude in 2008" which is outdated information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.168.180 (talk) 03:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xksed64cI5o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN32-r75O8I —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.211.190.10 (talk) 21:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move. However there's a rough consensus that we need to hammer out what's included in the article.Cúchullain ^t/c 15:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

---

List of cases of police brutality → List of cases of alleged police brutality – Simple NPOV. "Police brutality" is a highly subjective term, which can cover a multitude of sins from a justifiable description of an overt murder by police to a highly biased description by anti-police/anti-establishment elements of a perfectly legal arrest of a dangerous criminal. This list is clearly by its very nature going to attract POV entries, so best not to dignify it with such a definitive title. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Necrothesp. I think your idea is reasonable. I also tentatively disagree. It shouldn't be impossible to refer to police brutality in an encyclopedic way. We do have a list of war crimes. We also have dozens of lists of terrorist incidents—a designation which is, IMO, much more subjective. (OTOH there's a list of satanic ritual abuse allegations — so-titled, I think, because the conventional wisdom is that many were imaginary.)

That being said, the word "brutality" packs a lot of emotional punch without providing much precision. I think the articles on police brutality and police brutality in the United States are reasonably titled because they refer to a culture/psychology; however, it's difficult to prove a that this culture played a primary role in a particular incident. Maybe "excessive force" would be a better term in the case of the lists.

Also, certainly, you should point out which particular cases you think are particularly weak examples. I think the Killing of Kenneth Chamberlain, Sr. is an example of not only excessive force but also brutality, due to direct evidence of a racist motive. The Accra tear gas stampede—awful as it sounds—may not really be brutality because the deaths were caused inadvertently through the resulting stampede.groupuscule (talk) 14:37, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Even if police brutality was not the direct cause of the deaths at the Accra stadium, it is documented that the police fired tear gas and plastic bullets indiscrimately into the crowd, which sounds like brutality to me. – Fayenatic London 17:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose, to restrict the scope of the list. Using the word "alleged" initially sounds like an improvement to reflect NPOV, but it would widen the scope of the list, and invite people to add less notable or less well established cases.

  I am in the process of expanding this list and creating various national sub-lists to implement Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 June 1#Police brutality, listifying former categories of cases of police brutality. Necrothesp has already renamed List of cases of police brutality in the United Kingdom to include the word "alleged" on WP:NPOV grounds. I propose that these lists should be restricted to established cases, not merely cases where an allegation has been made and has citations. This scope should not necessarily be restricted to cases that resulted in a criminal conviction of an officer, but where there was at least a substantial case to answer, as indicated by a prosecution being mounted or substantial media coverage of apparent brutality. IMHO this is covered by the current heading here at List of cases of police brutality:

  This list compiles incidents of police brutality that have garnered significant media and/or historical attention.

  It would probably be good to replicate this in the headings of the national lists.

  The List of cases of police brutality in the United States is very long and I have not examined whether any of its contents would be removed under my proposal. – Fayenatic London 17:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Comment. "Police brutality" is a loaded phrase in the first place. Who decides? To a person who generally supports the police/establishment it means something quite different than to a person who generally opposes the police/establishment. To the former it would probably mean only a real beating or clear murder, to the latter it could well mean any instance where the police have used force, even in the arrest of a dangerous criminal (particularly if that criminal came from a minority group). The case of Ian Tomlinson is a perfect case in point. It's included on this list, but the former group would almost certainly not class it as police brutality (misguided perhaps, but not brutality), whereas the latter would. That's why, in my opinion, NPOV should be maintained with the addition of the "alleged". -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
  • In Wikipedia, the usage of the phrase in lists or categories should follow the lead article Police brutality. The current definition there, which seems to be stable, is "Police brutality is the wanton use of excessive force, usually physical, but potentially in the form of verbal attacks and psychological intimidation, by a police officer." As for Tomlinson's case, even though the officer was not convicted of manslaughter, the inquest verdict was unlawful killing. – Fayenatic London 17:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• Comment, if a particular incident is "brutal" or not seems to me always alleged. Thus, this proposal seems to only add an unnecessary word to the title. --The Evil IP address (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It is always alleged, but the trouble with the current title is its a statement of fact that these are cases of police brutality, thats why a qualifier of alleged would help ensure NPOV, although in my opinion "police brutality" label still lacks NPOV and there might be better ways of describing this. BritishWatcher (talk) 13:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

It would be better if the contents of these lists were only confirmed or widely-accepted cases of police brutality. Someone posted on the talk page for the US list, "I am looking for confirmed cases of police brutality not alleged. can the title be changed to alleged cases of police brutality please?" I don't see that throwing the doors open to include cited allegations would make the lists more useful or encyclopedic. Rather than changing the title of the US list, its contents should be trimmed, removing any cases that are mere allegations; and criteria for inclusion should be stated.

It might help to make these lists into tables, with columns for

1. date & location
2. details of the case
3. grounds for notability
4. outcome of investigation/ prosecution.

What do editors think of this suggestion? – Fayenatic London 17:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Great idea. I support the idea that we should first become more rigorous about inclusion. We shouldn't eliminate our ability to use the phrase 'police brutality' encyclopedically just because it's difficult to do so—we should rise to the challenge and do it right! List of terrorist incidents and its subset pages should adopt similar standards.

Police brutality is a difficult term to handle, as I wrote above. At the same time, it does have more meaning than some are giving credit for. Look at the Wikipedia pages for police brutality and police brutality in the United States. They don't refer to these as 'alleged' phenomena, nor should they!

1. Excessive force is a necessary if not sufficient condition. Shooting to kill when there's demonstrably no threat to the officer would be an example of excessive force. As I said above, if we really don't like the term 'police brutality', then we should change the title to 'excessive force' before we weaken the whole thing by adding 'alleged'.
2. If we do keep the term itself, we should include this dimension of 'savage cruelty' implied by the root term 'brute'. Beating the shit out of someone under arrest before you bring them in—that's brutal because there is an additional layer of clear sadism, often with obvious racist motivations. Racism is not "subjective"! Sometimes there is widespread agreement–including by government authorities, the legal system, and the general public–that this level of excess has been reached. The Diallo case could not, at this point, be referred to as a case of merely "alleged" police brutality.

I get the sense that those wishing to move the page that this is an issue of peaceniks vs. cops or something. Many police officers do not want to feel as though they are in a state of permanent warfare against the populations they are trying to serve. Many minority police officers do not support the use of obvious racist force against other minorities. Police brutality is a real, widely-recognized thing that hurts everyone, including the police. love, groupuscule (talk) 19:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. It's a case of NPOV against POV. Yes, of course police brutality exists and is opposed by all right-thinking people (including the majority of police officers, at least in democratic countries). But it means very different things to different people. A police officer would not generally consider the use of ordinary force to arrest a criminal to be brutality. Another person may well do so, whether that be for well-meaning (if misguided) reasons, for anti-establishment reasons ("everything the police do is by definition wrong"), for criminal reasons (criminals don't tend to like the police for obvious reasons) or simply because they are not fully aware of the facts (e.g. coming round the corner and seeing the police using force on an individual, having missed the individual previously attacking a police officer). Hence my proposal of the addition of "alleged". -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• Strong Support - A much more appropriate title. BritishWatcher (talk) 13:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose This appears to be an article scope issue not a name issue. If the reliable sources classify a given event as being "police brutality" I see no issue with including it. Likewise, if the source material does not classify the event as police brutality and is a conclusion that was reached by a given editor it should be removed. Whether a criminal conviction results is entirely irrelevant, it only matters that there is reliable source material to support the position. If you desire to have a section called alleged for those under debate that would work too but a name change doesn’t appear necessary.--Labattblueboy (talk) 16:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

US section deletion

This article needs a lot of work. It is true that lots of the US-related information should be deleted and there should be a link to the US article. However, one should not delete all of the US cases. We should leave what is most important and a short summary should be provided. So i suggest that rather than blanket delete all US aspect, we should edit it more carefully and link to the US page.

We should also work on providing a more well-rounded article that doesn't focus only on US/Canada and Europe. Police brutality happens everywhere in the world so that should be reflected in the article.Frombelow (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

There is enough police brutality in the world for everyone. The article is only a list and case summary. There should be a separate regional lists for various regions like Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Far East. That way the most egregious examples of police brutality get mentioned and the nice people who like to abuse their authority and abuse people don't feel left out. There are different cultural and sociological factors involved in various regions. And somebody in London may not be interested in a police brutality case in Little Rock, Arkansas. 7mike5000 (talk) 17:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

@Frombelow: List of cases of police brutality in the United States has been deleted, so the coverage of this topic is unbalanced again. Should this article be undeleted, then? Jarble (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

US Centric

This article only lists US cases of police brutality. I suggestion retitling the article as "List of cases of police brutality (United States)" and then creating a disambiguen page of this current title linking to specific pages of brutality in other countries.Frombelow (talk) 18:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

support. also needs updating.... there have been many worldwide and US issues (i believe) which have not been added to this 142.177.61.90 (talk) 02:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

This information was moved to a separate list of cases of police brutality in the United States, which was deleted last year. Jarble (talk) 21:12, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of cases of police brutality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022160117/http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/11/29/police.court/index.html to http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/11/29/police.court/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080603013811/http://www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationresources/xenophobia/articles/racist.htm to http://www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationresources/xenophobia/articles/racist.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616103839/http://www.stream.aljazeera.com/story/macedonia to http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/macedonia

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:13, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of cases of police brutality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829082334/http://www.policeombudsman.org/publicationsuploads/Devenny-report.pdf to http://www.policeombudsman.org/publicationsuploads/Devenny-report.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Cases of police brutality in the United States

@Sandstein: Since you deleted the article about cases of police brutality in the United States, Wikipedia no longer includes any information about cases that occurred in the United States. Is there any chance that any of this information will be undeleted? Jarble (talk) 19:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Why should it be? Sandstein 20:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Sandstein: Since only the article about the United States was deleted, the article's geographic scope now seems unbalanced, though there are still many articles about cases of police brutality in other countries (India, United Kingdom, etc.) To avoid this geographic imbalance in coverage, it might be worthwhile to undelete it. Jarble (talk) 22:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Quite possibly, but this does not address the reasons for the deletion given in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cases of police brutality in the United States, so I'll not undelete the article. The imbalance could also be remedied by nominating this article for deletion as well. Sandstein 09:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

West Virginia State Troopers Beating Teen 2018

This needs to be in the list, how they found the sheriffs did not break their rules let alone laws of assault the way the hand cuffed prisoner head was bashed into the road etc..... Shocking!--HalloHelloHalloHello (talk) 10:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)