Arrest On Green Sparks Debate

Courtesy Dan CarmodyJerome Richardson and his allies say the cops provoked an argument with him, falsely arrested him, and used excessive force. The cops say their officers used restraint as Richardson taunted them and prevented them from handling three separate, simultaneous tense public-safety matters.

You can watch the video and decide for yourself.

The accusations stem from an incident that occurred Tuesday around 5:15 p.m. at the bus stop at Church and Chapel streets.

The cops arrested Richardson, who’s 25, on charges of breach of peace and interference. They said that he got in their way as they tried to make unrelated arrests. They brought him to the police station. Witnesses and other social-justice activists who happened to be present followed in protest of what they called police misconduct. The police later released Richardson on a promise to appear in court.

Now top cops are sifting through the different versions of what happened, and through multiple police body-camera videos. One of the witnesses, activist Kerry Ellington, submitted a written statement to the internal affairs division Wednesday afternoon with her version.

In response to a request form the Independent, the police expedited release of body camera footage of the arrest. Another activist present, Dan Carmody, provided cellphone video footage of the immediate aftermath.

The case, including other situations the police were handling at the time of Richardson’s arrest, brings to the fore three separate current trends in public discussion about policing:

• The prevalence of police and citizen video in assessing police actions.
• The training of police to deescalate, rather than escalate, situations with citizens with whom they come into conflict.
• The debate over how police should deal with public disorder on the Green, where homeless people as well as substance abusers who come to town for methadone treatment often congregate. The police face both pressure from the public to restore order and criticism from activists about respecting people’s rights.

Assistant Police Chief Otoniel Reyes, who oversees patrol, said Wednesday that it will take a while to get the full story. Much more video footage remains to be examined, to show the incident from multiple angles as well as the 20 minutes of lead-up involving heated discussions between Richardson and the police. An internal review will also include interviews with officers on the scene.

“We haven’t made any verdict yet. We’re looking at it,” Reyes said. “Preliminarily it doesn’t appear like the officers broke any rules. This was clearly someone who was baiting the officers.” The review will look in part at “if this incident could have been handled differently.”

Jerome Richardson said the police could have done one big thing differently: Leave him alone. He said he suffered a bloody lip and facial swelling as a result of the takedown.

“I understand cops have their job to do. It felt like it was unlawful,” Richardson told the Independent. “I’m only about 135 pounds soaking wet. For them to have two officers take me down, it was painful.”

Crunch Time

NHPDPolice had their hands full at the time of Tuesday’s incident. Officers were responding to three separate incidents near the bus stops on the Green directly across form 900 Chapel St.: A woman had passed out from an apparent overdose; officers were working to get her medical help. They came across a person wanted on a warrant. And a man was drinking alcohol from an open container.

Jerome Richardson was hanging out in the area. So were people he knows from a local police-monitoring activist group, who were handing out flyers for a film series.

Richardson,who is 25 and currently unemployed, said he “witnessed an officer antoagonizing a civilian.” He said the police were arresting her without “reading her her rights.”

As a Wilbur Cross student, Richardson had participated in a group called Youth Rights Media, which researched and documented allegations of police misconduct. He began speaking up about the police in this case.

“I was under the impression that if somebody was going to be arrested,” Richardson recalled telling one of the officers. “I didn’t want to cause a scene and look like I was interfering with the officers. I began to ask the officers the questions: Can you arrest a person without reading their rights? After they began to tell me I was wrong that you don’t have to read somebody their rights to be arrested, they appeared to be antagonizing another person.”

(According to Assistant Chief Racheal Cain, officers do not by law have to read arrestees their rights to remain silent at the time of their arrest — unless they’re being interrogated about matters about which they can claim a constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination. Those Miranda rights are usually read at the police station when officers or detectives question arrestees.)

Activist Ellington happened to come upon the scene at that point on her way home from work. She used to work with Richardson at Youth Rights Media. They shook hands, hugged. “The police are harassing people,” Richardson told her.

They also ran into Dan Carmody, one of the activists handing out flyers. He had been helping a man on a bench set up a bluetooth speaker when the man “took a swig from a plastic bag” and was then confronted by officers, Carmody later told the Independent. He said the officers reported the man had an open warrant, and began to arrest him.

Carmody joined the conversation with Ellington and Richardson and complained about police misconduct.

They stood a few feet away from the officers dealing with the other arrests and intoxication problems. Richardson’s back was to the officers. But they could hear his remarks.

The next moments are visible in an officer body camera video police released Wednesday afternoon to the Independent. (It appears at the top of this story.)

“What rights are you speaking of?” Officer John Brangi asked Richardson.

“I’m not even talking to you,” Richardson said.

“I’ll talk to whoever I want,” responded Brangi. (Brangi is a member of the cadet class of 2015, at whose graduation Mayor Toni Harp warned new officers to be prepared for “closer scrutiny” from the public in the new era of citizen video and calls for police accountability.)

“And I’m going to talk to whoever I want to,” Richardson stated as he turned to face the officer.

Officer Michael Hinton (another member of the Class of 2015) stepped forwarded. He ordered Richardson to “give us some room to work.”

“Why?” Richardson asked. “Our conversaton was right here.”

At that point Hinton reached his hand to Richardson.

“Yo,” Richardson told the officer. “Don’t touch me.”

Police said Hinton was acting to guide Richardson away from a scene so officers could do their work. Richardson, Ellington and Carmody said Hinton “shoved” Richardson.

In either case, multiple officers were soon wrestling Richardson to the ground.

“Stop resisting,” one officer commanded as the cops were handcuffing Richardson.

“I’m not resisting,” he responded.

“Give me your arm.”

“You got it. You got it. You got it. You got it. You got it. I’m not moving.”

Richardson and Carmody pulled out their phones to video-record the incident. They were too late the capture the arrest, but they caught the aftermath.

An officer ordered Ellington and others to step back, while stating that they were free to video-record.

“Don’t touch me sir,” Ellington said.

The above video shows what Carmody captured with his phone.

Ellington and Carmody, and a number of the other leafletters and their allies, proceeded to 1 Union Ave., asked for information on Richardson, and waited a few hours until his release. They vowed to press the accusations of misconduct.

Click here to read the statement that Ellington submitted the following day to the police.

Early Video Tests

Courtesy Dan CarmodyCourtesy Dan CarmodyBoth sides — police officials and the activists — argued that events not shown on the video released so far or seen from different body-camera angles would bolster their cases: That Richardson had been taunting the police and getting in the way (according to cops); or that he had been minding his own business when the police created and then escalated a confrontation.

Under Freedom of Information law, the police did not have to release any body camera footage as soon as Wednesday, less than 24 hours after the event. Assistant Chief Cain said the department is committed to offering video as promptly as possible to address concerns raised by the public.

Releasing more footage will take longer because staff has to screen it carefully to see if any parts need to be redacted under law. And like other departments that have also recently outfitted officers with body cameras, the police are facing multiple requests that can back up. The Board of Alders last week removed a position from the new city budget that would have helped the police handle these video-release requests by adding another staff person.

Police departments are still getting used to the process of handling body camera video and responding to public requests for release. Results from early tests have been mixed. Yale University’s police department — in this instance —sought to find reasons to delay release as long as possible, or even not to release video at all, in the very kinds of case that the new cameras were supposed to help address. (Yale has a history of skirting Freedom of Information law with its police department, which has state-granted powers to detain, arrest and shoot people.) New Haven’s department, in early tests like Tuesday’s incident on the Green and this one last December, has found ways, even with stretched resources, to respond promptly.

Tags: , ,

Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry


posted by: SparkJames on June 6, 2018  7:06pm

I don’t respect the police either.
I don’t want their help in an emergency.

Did you see how the initial subject just wanted to “gtf away” from the rowdy kid? He laughed… you know why? It wasn’t the kid who was the threat. It was the cops who at any minute could have started shooting.

Police should tested for steroids every six months
And be disarmed. The level of disrespect shown to these police officers is warranted.

God bless the freedom fighters who have the courage to treat police like that.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 6, 2018  8:00pm

I certainly would like to hear the statue that justified that young man’s arrest. He was standing away from the cops and talking to his friends about what they were doing.

What law did he break?

Why was he taken down and handcuffed?

Why were the yelling “Stop resisting” when he was not resisting, and “Stop moving” when he was not moving?

If these cops do not get reprimanded (and possibly sued) for this behavior, then we are admitting that the police in New Haven can arrest anyone they wish to, whenever they wish to, for whatever they wish to. 

It is clear that they arrested that young man because they didn’t like what he was saying. They violated his 1st and 4th Amendment rights. They should AT LEAST be suspended, if not fired.

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

posted by: wendy1 on June 6, 2018  8:36pm

I feel sorry for everyone involved especially if they pay property taxes.

Why does Cityhall and NHPD force trained and valuable officers to waste their time on the “Green”?????
Whatever goes on there is nothing compared to driveby shootings, murders, rapes, and home invasions which are crimes that require well trained law enforcement to solve.  I support the police and resent the fact that they are misused.  If their captain, evidently a Yale apologist, wastes them in this shameful fashion, we need a captain that can tell cityhall and Yale to go to Hell.

posted by: 1644 on June 6, 2018  9:00pm

No, police do not have to read anyone his rights when making an arrest.  In fact,  at no point is there a legal requirement to read anyone his rights.  However, if someone in custody makes an incriminating statement, that statement will likely be held to be coerced and involuntary, and hence it and any evidence it leads to will be inadmissible in court.

posted by: 1644 on June 6, 2018  9:30pm

Wendy:  Are you really saying the police should ignore a person passed out from an overdose, and possibly dying, because they are on the Green?  Or that they should try to apprehend those with outstanding warrants,  quite possibly for burglary or another of the crimes you complained of?  Other than the open container violation, I would think you would approve of the actions the police were taking.  As for setting priorities, I am happy that properties are set by elected officials, rather than unelected police captains.  When police set themselves above elected officials, we can wind up with Hoover’s FBI.

posted by: TheMadcap on June 6, 2018  10:13pm

This story aside, three different incidents happening at the same time around 5pm? At around 2pm the same thing happened, I saw medics/police responding to two different people on different parts of the green as well as on an Orange st bench as I walked down Chapel, and they all just looked very inebriated. This is nuts how bad it is getting in the immediate vicinity of the green, even when the city as a whole was considerably worse(re:drugs and crime), it was never concentrated in the city’s open public center like this.

posted by: narcan on June 7, 2018  2:24am

“According to Assistant Chief Cain”?

Ahem, no. According to the Supreme Court.

This is, of course, characteristic of the entire problem we see unfolding here. Street lawyers who think whatever nonsense they read on Facebook is law and that the sidewalk is a court room.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  6:13am

It is clear that Mr./Mrs/Ms? 1644 and Mr./Mrs/Ms? Madcap are desperately trying to distract from the issue and the question of the arrest.  Their’s is a CLEAR sign that the arrest is questionable at least, and obviously wrong, at best.

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

posted by: SpecialK on June 7, 2018  7:00am

NHPD officers should just shut down all proactive and self initiated policing activities. Respond to calls for service and put their blinders on for everything else they see along the way.

posted by: HewNaven on June 7, 2018  7:18am

Around 10AM Tuesday I witnessed a fist fight on the green, near the bus hub. This is one day!

posted by: Timothy G. ORourke Jr. on June 7, 2018  8:01am

“Just shut up.  Don’t say nothing.”  So says the conferees of the man who was taken away as he was taken away.  Perhaps, they should have helped him out and told him to shut up before he raised the tone of a situation of which he had no part other than to verbally incite those around him, those that eventually told him to shut up.  The police have every right to quickly suppress erroneous and intense claims that they doing something wrong when they are rightfully and simply giving someone a ticket. They do this so as to create a perimeter of safety for themselves.  Great job officers!  I guess in this era of ill civility will see more and more attempts to try to entrap police officers.  Hopefully, in the end, reasonable minds will prevail but I doubt it.  It seems as if people are trying to provoke an actual revolution.  I ask you, will such a revolution be actually based on objective injustice? I don’t think so.  Perhaps, you disagree. But there was certainly no peace for officers simply trying to give someone a ticket.  So, perhaps the people in this video, represenitive of the current milieu, do not actually want peace and they will try to paint every insistence of police involvement in society as unjust a means by which to effect the change they seek.

posted by: observer1 on June 7, 2018  8:04am

How does one define an “activist”? In this case, depending on your viewpoint, an individual can be an activist by; interfering with police doing their job, recording police reacting or overreacting to someone recording them, someone escalating a situation the police are trying to deescalate, and so forth. It is perception of an incident based on your personal views. If you do not like cops you see something that people that like cops do not see. If you see cops harassing a guy (who is drinking on the green and violating the law) by being courteous while issuing a ticket then you probably are anti cop and trying to provoke an incident.  If you see cops using zero force, being polite and trying to do their job then you are probably pro cop. It depends on your personal perspective. Some commentators evidently want the cops to pick and choose what laws to enforce. That is not their job. The police are sworn to enforce the law, all of the laws not just the ones you like. How the police do their jobs and if they enforce laws with a bias is a subject that is open for legitimate discussion. The law is a very complex subject better left to the courts to interpret and judge. This “activist” got arrested, a split lip and will go to court. I do not think it was worth it for him to get involved in a police action that involved nothing more than the issuance of a ticket in a courteous manner. My perception after seeing the video.

posted by: wendy1 on June 7, 2018  8:44am

I spend more time on the green than most of you.  If I see someone who looks dead or dying, I do something.  If someone asks for money, I give or at least act respectful and sympathetic.  I know the BLACK MAN’S CODE—do not argue with or TOUCH a police officer and keep your hands and bullhorn in sight.  In this town, black men and women and activists are usually well outnumbered by officers on the chance that we will RIOT ...or something worse.  I remember police guarding the Whalley Stop n’ Shop but not the East Haven one.  Recently I was approached by 2 officers (friendly) while using my bullhorn against the 11%.  I suggest you spend more time amongst your neighbors on the green.

posted by: LivingInNewHaven on June 7, 2018  8:56am

This guy sounded like Kanye screaming nonsense. The police asked him to move along as his antics had potential to escalate a situation that he had nothing to do with. He was asked to move and he acted crazy.  His lip got split because he wanted to ignore the request to move along.  Activist he is not.

posted by: Fairhavener on June 7, 2018  9:55am

People drink on the green during the Arts and Ideas Festival, what’s the discrepancy? Mind you, I feel like public drinking is not the worst thing, and it should / could be allowed during festivals—so long as you don’t act in a disorderly manner. I think it important to define why the man was bothered by the police and address why others are seemingly allowed to do so.

As for the kid with the busted lip, being in front of a police officer with a gun is not the time to act like a petulant child, though admittedly, you can’t see that fully on video. He could have just walked away though, I also didn’t see that in the footage.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  10:03am

Timothy G. ORourke Jr. wrote:

“The police have every right to quickly suppress erroneous and intense claims that they doing something wrong when they are rightfully and simply giving someone a ticket. They do this to create a perimeter of safety for themselves.”

Which part of the constitution are you quoting to draw this conclusion, Mr. O’Rourke?  And even if you are correct about this, how do you justifiably apply this notion to the situation that we see on tape? From the tape, you have little idea what the man was talking about.  The police unnecessarily involved themselves in his conversation with TWO other people.  They had to come over to where he was to do so.

Then one of the cops decided that the man needed to move along, but not the other people who were standing with him, whom you suggest were violating the “perimeter of safety” that the cops were trying to create. 

Those cops did not like what the man was saying and decided, illegally, to shut him down.  They started yelling “stop resisting,” when they knew that he was not resisting, but they wanted to create the notion that the man was causing a disturbance to add to the false one that the cops tried to pretend he was causing before they stopped him in the first place. 

It is not uncommon for some people to support virtually any police action against Black people. Your statement Mr. ORourke, Jr. is nothing more than a continuation of that sad and often racist tradition.

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  10:08am

Mr./Mrs./Ms. LivingInNewHaven,

So, the constitution on protects those who DON’T sound iike Kayne???  Your’s is perhaps the least intelligent and least helpful statement here. 

The Rev. Mr. Samuel T. Ross-Lee

posted by: concerned_neighbor on June 7, 2018  10:13am

While it is unfortunate that Mr. Richardson suffered a minor injury, the videos show that he interfered with the police officers doing their work. And he was arrested for it. Mr. Richardson had no business inserting himself into the situation.

Activism is important. Non-violent peaceful demonstrations changed our country. See, generally, MLK, James Farmer and the Freedom Rides. Provoking confrontations with the police is not activism.

posted by: LivingInNewHaven on June 7, 2018  10:24am

The fact that you say my comment is not intelligent isn’t saying much nor am I offended by it. The fact that you even thought that my reference about him sounding like Kanye had anything to do with his ignorant behavior makes me laugh and wonder about your intelligence. 😂😂😂😂

posted by: FeelingBlue on June 7, 2018  10:36am

Hey, activists, especially “unemployed” activists: please step away from the police. And swirling, loud, incoherent mass of people voicing their repetitive chants: please, step away from the police. To review: three separate incidents for the NHPD to deal with: an overdose, an outstanding warrant, drinking alcohol from an open container: typical for action on the “historic” Green and the fetid area of the bus-stop, opposite 900 Chapel. Anyone notice that this is all business as usual? That the bus-stop and the “historic” Green continue to be cesspools of illegal, indecent and obstructive behavior? That a stretched-thin NHPD is having to deal with these constant incidents when they could be dealing with worthwhile investigations? That the City and State legislators refuse to deal with the root problems of addiction, unemployment, disenfranchisement, abuse of services by out-of-town transients, and the heartbreaking plight of the truly homeless? That the maligned Police Officers are daily, hourly called on to clean up the sordid mess that legislators (are you listening, Alders? I thought not,) refuse to address? Look at the videos folks: no one is getting shot. No one is having the stuffing kicked out of them or having their face erased. Officer Brangi, class of 2015, is efficient, restrained, and, given the swirl of abuse, polite. I saw this Officer deal with an overdosed adult and a child left strapped, helpless in a car as the “grown up” OD’d. I have seen him deal with disoriented, addicted, hopeless people in a humane and helpful manner. I have seen him, and other NHPD Officers take the slander and abuse and just get on with their duties. If you have a beef with the Police, work with them, address them as human beings doing a job you would not, could not do. And get your damn legislators to do their jobs and address the root problems that result in these incidents, daily, endlessly. Want to protest real Police abuse? Move to a city where that stuff happens.

posted by: LivingInNewHaven on June 7, 2018  10:40am


posted by: Timothy G. ORourke Jr. on June 7, 2018  10:41am


It is Okay for you to disagree with me.  In fcat, I said as much.  It is objectively sinful for you to claim that my personal analysis of the tape is tantamount to a tradition of racism, as if I am a racist myself.  In our common tradition, to which we both share a common assent, an assent that goes beyond race, we call that rash judgment.  I will let you decide if you meet the two subjective criterions.  I will say that this general dispostion to call everthing racism, and to anticapate that it must be so while the police are doing thier job (and after, as your personal comments attest), is creating far more of a toxic enviorment than any acts of actual racism, of which this incident has absolutely no proof other than your opinion.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  11:01am

Mrs./Ms./Mr. concerned_neighbor,

Your Trump-like statement that ignores what is occurring to say something that is not apart of reality is more than “interesting; it’s lying at this point.

The young man was standing over to the side, having a conversation with two other people. There was no interference with the officers.  It was the officers who interfered with him.

Rev. Ross-Lee

posted by: THREEFIFTHS on June 7, 2018  11:18am

posted by: FeelingBlue on June 7, 2018 10:36am

Want to protest real Police abuse? Move to a city where that stuff happens.

Are you saying that in this city that there is no Police abuse?

posted by: christopher desir on June 7, 2018  12:39pm

@ Timmy O’Rourke:

I’ve noticed that you are defending yourself against accusations of racism quite often on these comment boards. Maybe it’s time for you to reflect on this, perhaps starting from the open minded perspective that you might spew coded and not so coded racist nonsense dressed up in a facade of sophistication and moral reasoning. I think you’re robbing yourself of some real opppotunities for growth by starting from the assumption that you are definitely not racist.

posted by: elmcitybornandraised on June 7, 2018  12:45pm

@Samuel T. Ross-Lee if you have a son, nephew, younger cousin etc… would advise them to stand a few feet from Law enforcement and talk loudly in reference to the situation that they were currently handling? What does that accomplish? If a person doesn’t agree with something as a citizen no problem. Stand back away from the situation, converse, film whatever…..I wouldn’t advise my son, nephew or niece to place themselves in a position to be discretion. That is why we hire attorney’s to fight those battles for us.

@SparkJames you have to be kidding me right? So you prefer to live in a lawless society via the film The Purge. Instead of having a day of the Purge you want it everyday? I’m so confused by your comment.

posted by: Nathan on June 7, 2018  12:58pm

As is often the case, everyone played a part in a bad situation.  The bystanders/activists did not seem to be a reasonable threat to the safety or effectiveness of the police at the time the officer choose to interact and escalate the situation - bad decision on the part of the officer.  I’ve had a bully cop threaten me when I refused to “move along” (with no police action happening), so I’m well aware of the attitude problems some cops have when they perceive threats to their sometimes exaggerated sense of authority.

But, once the officer initiated physical contact to force the activist to move away - again, in my opinion, a bad decision - total compliance is required, because anything less sets up what happens next: “You’re getting locked up”.  Again, only total compliance is an option.  Instead, the activist replies, “I’m not getting locked up” and pulls away - bad decision on the part of the activist.  That is resisting (the vaguely declared) arrest.  At this point, the police will escalate with physical force, exactly what happened.  Don’t fight the police on the street, fight with an attorney in court - with a lawsuit.

Is there a legally defined perimeter for police “action”?  Having that defined distance would help everyone involved in such situations know their rights and responsibilities.  One can fully support the many good cops who work hard within the law and still support the rights of citizens (and the press) who choose to observe various situations involving the police - from a safe and clearly defined distance.

posted by: Concord on June 7, 2018  1:08pm

Another false comment from a sidewalk lawyer. Know what your talking about before you make comments. NO you don’t have to read someone their rights to arrest them. Another Great job by New Havens Finest.

posted by: Welcome2NewHaven on June 7, 2018  1:09pm

The cops handled themselves correctly during this situation in my honest opinion. When they have just finished dealing with an OD (as well as other incidents) a few feet away, It would behoove them to address things they may normally overlook like an open container.

As for their request for Mr. Richardson to move along, they were trying to avoid a scene like what inevitable happened. If you’re spewing false information and facts while police are doing their jobs it can create a hostile and ultimately unsafe environment kinda like fire in a theater.

There are legitimate grievances and issues that need to be addressed with law enforcement in general, but I do not think villainizing the ones actually doing their job is helpful.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  1:19pm

Ms./Mr./Mrs. elmcitybornandraised,

What I may or may not tell my relative is no more relevant to this story and the accomapanying videos as your being elm city born and raised is to the points have made here.

Rev. Ross-Lee

posted by: Timothy G. ORourke Jr. on June 7, 2018  1:21pm

Dear Christopher Diser,

Nice to hear from you!

Well, I am not so sure if Freud would agree with you as sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. It seems logical to me.  Merely proposing a rational alterative to the racism narrative is likely to incur accusations of racism from which then is compelled to rationally defend as racism is the only lens from which one is allowed to see but to resort to psychobabble as a means by which to claim someone is not being reasonable is untenable. As I am not intransigent in my views, I do value your suggestion in being open.  However, there is nothing to see here other than exploiting every situation towards an agenda which portends exploitation in order to procure power.  You are free to disagree but, again, it seems logical to me.

posted by: narcan on June 7, 2018  1:39pm

It seems from my viewing that Mr. Richardson violated the EVERY MAN’S CODE…

There is no bright line for a perimeter. If the cops feel they need X distance for Y reason, that is what they use. If they are compelling people not related to their investigation to move, there needs to be a reason, but no law demands they communicate that reason at the time. I fail to see how this “youth leader” (Mother help the generation, have you seen his Facebook page?) would have been prevented from filming or witnessing from a few more steps away. It in all likelihood would have prevented the cops from ever paying attention to him.

I think the NHPD does a fine job of balancing their need to remove people who are actually hindering a scene with minimizing the impact of these (constant) incidents on normal people trying to get to work, errands, etc. With the never ending parade of nonsense on the green, it would simply not be practical to say we all have to stay “30ft away from the cops”. The whole green would be on permanent lock down.

posted by: elmcitybornandraised on June 7, 2018  2:03pm

Mr. Bass, why didn’t you attain/release the body cam video that occurred before this video in regards to the woman that was seen and taken by medical personnel?  Do you not believe that didn’t play a role in this whole situation?

[Paul: We have requested a lot of video. It takes a long time to vet/produce. They did a rush job for us on the arrest itself, went much faster than the law requires; it wasn’t possible to produce more on the first day.]

posted by: 1644 on June 7, 2018  2:18pm

Rev. Ross-Lee:  The statutes are these:

Sec. 53a-167a. Interfering with an officer: Class A misdemeanor. (a) A person is guilty of interfering with an officer when he obstructs, resists, hinders or endangers any peace officer or fireman in the performance of his duties.

Sec. 53a-181. Breach of the peace: Class A or B misdemeanor. (a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: (1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or (2) assaults or strikes another; or (3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or his property; or (4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or (5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or (6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which he is not licensed or privileged to do; or (7) places a nonfunctional imitation of an explosive or incendiary device in a public place. For purposes of this section, “public place” means any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests.

The article says, “I began to ask the officers the questions: Can you arrest a person without reading their rights? After they began to tell me I was wrong that you don’t have to read somebody their rights to be arrested, they appeared to be antagonizing another person.”  Clearly, questioning officers carrying out arrests, assisting an overdosing person, and giving a summons is distracting, and therefore hindering, at least to some extent.  Absent the video,  we cannot see if it was de minimis, or substantial enough to warrant an arrest.  Nor can we see what led the officers to think they needed to slam him to the ground.

posted by: ignatius on June 7, 2018  3:19pm

Here’s another way this could have gone down. “When a 25 year old activist, who spent high school years in a group that “researched and documented allegations of police misconduct” was asked by a police officer to step back; after he had engaged in 20 minutes of heated arguments with police about mistaken rights and insisted on continuing that discussion, with two other activists, who were ready and willing to film any police misconduct, but coincidentally not the heated discussion beforehand, within feet of a police officer issuing a ticket, serving a warrant, and caring for a medical emergency, HE DID. End of story.

posted by: Ozzie on June 7, 2018  4:13pm

All day the Green is filled with drug dealers, drug users and people causing problems . Mr. Richardson being a healthy 25 year old should have a job instead of hanging out there, Also if he went to poke me in the chest ( like what it looks like to me in the video) that finger may have gotten snapped .  As for Carmody and his video of the aftermath, that always seems to be the case, never what happened to begin with.

posted by: Morgan Barth on June 7, 2018  4:33pm

In the age of the body cam some videos are going show clearly who was wrong and who was right…but many others will just become a Rorschach test like this one.

posted by: Sabrina-in-NewHaven on June 7, 2018  5:30pm

Where are all of these so-called activists when I am on my way home from work at the bus stop and I get approached by all kinds of men selling stuff on the street? Never anywhere to sit because they are people who linger all day. Smoking cigarettes. Selling loosies. Selling pills. How come I see all this and not one activist is speaking out about this. They are not worried about public safety. This guy is a young hothead who wanted attention. The cops could have ignored him though. It was unnecessary. People are just buffet activist. Absolutely no one is out there trying to keep folks safe.

posted by: challenge on June 7, 2018  6:40pm

Is this an example of community policing or the neighborhood walk program? Is this how police engage our young people? Looks more like an occupation of out of control, abusive, egotistical officers. I thought body cameras were suppose to make a difference in police behavior. Looks like yet another waste of taxpayer money. Cameras won’t change the culture of a militaristic style of policing especially if leadership is lacking. Expected outcome: IA exonerates officers. Police Commissioners rubber stamp conclusion. Allegations of misconduct unfounded. Lawsuit follows. On to the next case.

posted by: Samuel T. Ross-Lee on June 7, 2018  7:27pm

Ms./Mrs./Mr. 1644,

I’m glad you provided a group of statues that do not apply to what we can clearly see in the video.  Thank You for helping to make my point.

Rev. Ross-Lee

posted by: JCFremont on June 8, 2018  10:04am

Do you need to have credentials or be registered with the city to become an “Activist.” The kid with phone camera was told he may continue to video the scene but was told to step back, he wasn’t told (not ordered) to go across the street or even move back, just to step back. Our Junior Activist, looking for cred, ups the game by moving forward, congratulations I guess you earned your merit badge. So in the end the city will lose, AGAIN. Sued for doing something, sued for doing nothing, sued for doing too much, sued for not doing enough.

posted by: Makincomments on June 14, 2018  12:58am

Moral of the story.. be respectful to others and you won’t go to jail. Simple but difficult for some.

posted by: challenge on June 15, 2018  6:11pm

Moral of the story: When the department lacks integrity, quality leadership, police restraint, minimizes excessive force,  and no accountability for rogue behavior taxpaying residents will pay the price.

posted by: Makincomments on June 16, 2018  1:06am

Challenge has a lot to say about finger pointing and placing blame elsewhere. Let’s start with adults behaving like adults, very basic.