lundi 18 juillet 2011

KENNETH HARDING AND POLICE CHOICE

Kenneth Harding is the latest police victim in a community where the residents do not trust law enforcement. The Bay View / Hunters Point community took to the streets as they heard shots fired in the neighborhood. Witnesses shared that all shots fired sounded as if “they were from the same gun or type of gun.” However, police share a different story.

According to ABC 7 News, police officers reported, “the suspect, 19-year old Kenneth Harding, was armed and fired first at officers...” Outspoken community residents were sure that Harding wasn’t in possession of a fire arm. This is a unique step in a new direction for urban communities. In many situations where Black men are murdered the community has shown to follow the “no snitching” code of silence.

THE YOUTUBE VIDEO

In the crowd of onlookers was a man who began filming the aftermath of the police action as more community residents began pouring into the streets; some with camera phones in hand. In his video he shows a silver hand gun a few feet away from the victim and a different object in even closer proximity to the victim. The video clearly shows a man picking up the closer object, the creator of the YouTube video makes mention that the same man picked up the hand gun previously.

Although the YouTube video shows a small silver hand gun not far from the suspect – it hardly proves the hand gun belonged to the suspect. To be honest, the hand gun could have fell out of the pocket or socks of anyone running towards the scene to witness the police activity.

KTVU CHANNEL 2 NEWS REPORT

KTVU wasted no time assassinating the character of the already assassinated man. In their report, posted at 8:27am PDT July 18th, they ignore mentioning the victim’s name in the title and opening paragraph. It isn’t until the second paragraph that his name is mentioned.
Why do media report in such a slanted way? This type of reporting is to de-sensitize the general community from caring about this young man’s life and seeks to thwart the community from noticing police misconduct.

Let’s be clear! KTVU reported the San Francisco Police as having stated the suspect, Kenneth Harding, was considered “a person of interest in a South Seattle shooting last Wednesday that killed 19-year-old Tanaya Gilbert and wounded three others.”

What should be reported is the officers who shot and killed Harding did not know this information prior to shooting him and allowing him to bleed out towards his death.

What does “person of interest” mean? Based upon this type of reporting it suggests the suspect, Kenneth Harding, DID actually kill Tanaya Gilbert, wound three others and subsequently come to SF to evade felony charges. The problem is a “person of interest” does not necessitate or prove any guilt, but coupled with the news of SFPD shooting Harding - it leads the reader to erroneous speculations.

Another troubling aspect of the usage of the phrase “person of interest” is the insinuation to the community that they should not rally for justice regarding Hardings’ right to due process. The immediate reaction of the SF Community was outrage, then media comes along and seeks to wag the dog by dumping negative speculation in hopes the community will assume the police were justified; therefore quieting communal outrage.

KTVU further reported, “…the man was shot in a confrontation with police at a transit platform Saturday, and was a parolee from Washington State.”

The problem with this report is the officers didn’t know this information prior to questioning Harding for fare evasion. The only reason why the officers came in contact with Harding was due to their desire of knowing did he pay the proper $2 fare to ride the local transportation system: MUNI.

Harding was stopped by police at Third Street and Palou Avenue and according to reports the approximate times was 4:45pm. He would be pronounced dead at a local hospital at 7:01pm. What happened to him in between? This question must be answered in detail.

PROTESTERS DEMANDS

According to ABC Channel 7 news, Protesters gathered on Monday afternoon “to call for the FBI and a citizens oversight committee to investigate the San Francisco police’s fatal shooting…”
Although these are standard demands by local residents in cooperation with local community organizers – a few other questions demand answers.

First Demand Question: How long does it take for a medical team to respond to a police-involved shooting call from the police versus a civilian’s call for medical response to a shooting victim?

In many cases the community has no clue of what to expect when it comes to medical responses. This question must be answered and the answer must line up with the events from Saturday’s police activity. If not, someone needs to be held accountable.

Second Demand Question: At what point did police officers call for medical attention?

After police officers shot the suspect and the suspect laid on the ground -in obvious pain and defenseless – at what point were the officers to call for medical attention? What is the written policy regarding these types of situations and did the police officers involved follow proper policies and protocol?

Third Demand Question: Are the medical calls between police and medical responders recorded? If so, publicly make the recordings available.

The purpose behind this question is to determine if police have certain codes with medical responders when they want the response time to be delayed. The community does not trust the police in most urban communities and this sort of transparent accountability can assist in bridging the trust barriers.

If the police followed their proper policy and the medical responders didn’t respond in appropriate time – someone must be publicly held accountable.

CONCLUSION

In the end, the community residents of the Bay View / Hunter’s Point will NEVER trust the police so long as the police department operates as Police Choice.

Police Choice is the idea that once a police officer shoots a potential suspect they have the power to determine if that suspect lives or dies based upon needed medical attention.

Kenneth Harding laid helpless on the streets of San Francisco in a pool of blood surrounded by local police officers – who at the time knew absolutely nothing about his background, personal run in with law enforcement, his residency of Seattle or former arrest record. Remember, he was pursued for running away from officers over a $2 fee for fare.

If the courts would have found Kenneth Harding guilty of any of the allegations known after he was shot – then justice would be served and the system worked. But, we will never know because police officers, who knew nothing about his history, seemingly, delayed him medical attention.

Police Officers can’t be given such authority and they should never be allowed to make such decisions to circumvent the courts and due process of the law.

Rise up community and expect better before the next bullet flies and the next blood droplet falls.

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire