Another Isolated Incident
Radley Balko | December 18, 2008, 3:00pm
But not a drug raid. A prostitution raid.
It was a little before 8 at night when the breaker went out at Emily Milburn's home in Galveston. She was busy preparing her children for school the next day, so she asked her 12-year-old daughter, Dymond, to pop outside and turn the switch back on.
As Dymond headed toward the breaker, a blue van drove up and three men jumped out rushing toward her. One of them grabbed her saying, "You're a prostitute. You're coming with me."
Dymond grabbed onto a tree and started screaming, "Daddy, Daddy, Daddy." One of the men covered her mouth. Two of the men beat her about the face and throat.
As it turned out, the three men were plain-clothed Galveston police officers who had been called to the area regarding three white prostitutes soliciting a white man and a black drug dealer.
All this is according to a lawsuit filed in Galveston federal court by Milburn against the officers. The lawsuit alleges that the officers thought Dymond, an African-American, was a hooker due to the "tight shorts" she was wearing, despite not fitting the racial description of any of the female suspects. The police went to the wrong house, two blocks away from the area of the reported illegal activity...
So you'd think that after the police figured out they had the wrong house, they'd apologize, and possibly even compensate the girl and her family. According to the lawsuit, you'd be wrong:
After the incident, Dymond was hospitalized and suffered black eyes as well as throat and ear drum injuries.
Three weeks later, according to the lawsuit, police went to Dymond's school, where she was an honor student, and arrested her for assaulting a public servant. Griffin says the allegations stem from when Dymond fought back against the three men who were trying to take her from her home. The case went to trial, but the judge declared it a mistrial on the first day, says Griffin. The new trial is set for February.
I have a call into the Galveston district attorney and with Dymond Milburn's lawyer. We're going on a press account of one side of a lawsuit, here. So it's possible—and I would hope—that there are some important details missing.
Otherwise, a police mistake leads to an innocent 12-year-old getting violently snatched up and roughed up by a group of plainclothes cops jumping out of a van . . . and they charge her for resisting?
Brendan Perez | December 18, 2008, 5:09pm | #
Several people have talked about using force to defend themselves. Once you do it, your life is over; there is no fair trial for killing a cop.
Large segments of the public will reflexively side against you, you will lose your job, home, and possessions, etc. At that point, you have nothing to lose.
When you consider it like this, the police lobbying for laws that make killing a police officer a capital offense may end up being their undoing because it no longer matters if it's one cop or one thousand.
Shoot the intruders first, then worry about their employer. If you do discover that the intruders happen to work for the police department, you may as well put yourself in the mindset that you're looking at your own death in the mirror. You're dead-you either get executed, die rotting in jail, or die on your knees surrendering to the cops ("accidental discharge", "sudden movement", etc.)
At that point, you should probably consider yourself to be in "sending a message" mode-that is, kill every single one of them at the scene and burn their bodies if you get a chance (let the families bury a charred corpse-may inspire some interesting intra-familial conversations about integrity and restraint). Then do your best to kill every responder before they kill you.
You're goal should be to make it so costly to be a scumbag cop that other cops have no choice but to think twice about acting that way. Fellow cops may also learn not to allow other cops to act that way lest they end up responding to a situation started by a scumbag cop.
It's extreme, excessive, and sheds a lot of blood, but so do police tactics as of late.
Neu Mejican | December 19, 2008, 1:12pm | #
JW,
My skepticism is aimed particularly at charges that they used excessive force (attempting to stuff her into a van is her claim, not an undisputed fact, so this is included). Without knowing the details, it is hard to judge why force was used. The girls injuries indicate that there is a good chance excessive force was used, but given the vague one-sided account, it is impossible to tell.
I haven't had a chance to look at the report CharlesWT posted yet, so I am still reserving judgment.
My main criticism, by the way, was not aimed at the girl, and I was not defending the cops...my main criticism is aimed at RB (and the rag that he linked to, I guess) for posting only one-side of the story when it is not that hard to get both sides of the story.
The reason this is a problem is apparent from the reactions on this comments thread. People take the account as true and instantly jump to the emotional "fucking cops" reaction without knowing what really occurred. It is piss poor journalism.
RB is good enough that he will follow up, I imagine, but why the pre-emptive post?
As for your basic facts.
Arresting the wrong person, a mistake, not criminal behavior, not abuse of power. That is why we have that "innocent until proven guilty thing." Everyone that is arrested should be assumed to be innocent...and treated accordingly. This family claims they were not treated accordingly, and their claims should be heard, but making a claim against the cops doesn't mean they don't also deserve the presumption of innocence also.
And, indeed, it will be important to be skeptical of the cops account as ass-covering is a powerful motivation. That is why we have due process. To weigh the competing claims.
Trial by media is, in my opinion, a very dangerous trend in our society...journalists do it because of the wonderful visceral reaction it gets (read JsubD above, and the bulk of the other comment here if you don't believe me). Consumers of news shape what gets reported with this kind of reaction and encourage this kind of sloppy reporting.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
