Talk:List of cases of police brutality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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)

Contents 1 Changes to this article 2 Fair use rationale for Image:Cardenas-YouTube.jpg 3 US-centric 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Randdogs030198.jpg 5 Carol Anne Gotbaum 6 The Taser Incident at Vancouver Intl. Airport

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)