Officer in UC Davis pepper-spray incident to get $38,059

Remember this incident during the Occupy movement? NO?

Well here is the video.....



Now check this out!

He filed for workers comp and GOT IT!

The former University of California, Davis police officer who pepper-sprayed Occupy protesters has reached a worker's compensation settlement with the university system.

The Davis Enterprise reports that a judge on Oct. 16 approved the $38,059 settlement between John Pike and the University of California.

The 40-year-old former officer said he suffered depression and anxiety after death threats to him and his family after the Nov. 18, 2011 event.

Source

Not only did he act like the Gestapo, but because his feelings got hurt from his criminal actions, he made a nice chuck of cash!!

Well, there is no doubt in my mind that the police state is here to stay now. Now they get rewarded for having their feelings hurt for doing the wrong thing!

seeker1963
Remember this incident during the Occupy movement? NO?

Well, there is no doubt in my mind that the police state is here to stay now. Now they get rewarded for having their feelings hurt for doing the wrong thing!

Hey! On a positive note his despicable action made for a great avatar theme, no?

Now, ramp this guy's compensation up by a factor of 50 and you've got Lois Lerner.

reply to post by Snarl


lol, I seriously don't know how to reply to that one!

Oh f-this dude...

My father had major chemical damage done to him at a chemical plant, burned, long term illness, strokes and mental health problems from the event.

Hes been fighting Workmans comp in CA for years still getting nothing, BS.

Let's see:
Protestors told multiple times not to block the road, check.
Given orders to disperse them, check.
You have the right to "peaceably to assemble" which these protestors obviously didn't follow.

PsykoOps
Let's see:
Protestors told multiple times not to block the road, check.
Given orders to disperse them, check.
You have the right to "peaceably to assemble" which these protestors obviously didn't follow.

What does that have to do with this guy's workman's comp claim?

reply to post by PsykoOps


I would gladly rather be handcuffed and have my ass hauled away, rather than be pepper sprayed in the face!!! The fact is that if they were breaking the law, why weren't they hand cuffed and arrested????

Right..................they weren't breaking the law, they were just being an inconvenience to their oppressors so they were sprayed.

Heil Hitler right??????

seeker1963
reply to post by PsykoOps

 

I would gladly rather be handcuffed and have my ass hauled away, rather than be pepper sprayed in the face!!! The fact is that if they were breaking the law, why weren't they hand cuffed and arrested????

Right..................they weren't breaking the law, they were just being an inconvenience to their oppressors so they were sprayed.

Heil Hitler right??????

Lets not mention that theres probably a good example of improper use of pepper spray, anyone know police force guidelines for implementation?

PsykoOps
Let's see:
Protestors told multiple times not to block the road, check.
Given orders to disperse them, check.
You have the right to "peaceably to assemble" which these protestors obviously didn't follow.

The police serve society, it is not the other way around.

Given orders? Get stuffed!

It was a protest protected by the constitution.

It is about time that protesters used the second and go armed! That cop should be in jail!

P

pheonix358
It was a protest protected by the constitution. It is about time that protesters used the second and go armed!

Really? This (heavily edited to meet the T&C) is what happens (and worse) when guns are involved in civil disobedience.

My fellow Americans, My name is A*** K***** and I am a political prisoner. I have been in jail for over three months for loading a shotgun at Freedom Plaza on Independence Day in defiance of DC gun laws to assert my rights allegedly protected by the 2nd amendment. I have yet to be indicted, let alone tried. My home was raided and ransacked for over 5 hours. I was kept in solitary confinement in cells with ants, cockroaches, water leaks, lights on for 24 hours a day, without a mattress, and I was fed so little I lost 15 pounds in the first three weeks. This is what “gun control” looks like.

I harmed or threatened no one, yet for this victimless non-crime, I have been held without bail because of clerical errors that my judge refuses to acknowledge. When I go to trial, I will be arguing that if there is no victim, there is no crime, and it will not just be my civil disobedience on trial, not just gun control, not just the enforcement of unconstitutional laws, not just the criminal injustice system, but the entire idea of government force and the government that has become the greatest enemy of freedom will be on trial. I will be fighting for my freedom, and yours, but you will never be free until you stand up for yourself and demand to be free. I would never ask you to follow me, but I dearly hope that you will join me.

TPTB have control.

reply to post by Snarl


Yea, it is a bit different when 10,000 armed citizens do it. Lone wolf gets nowhere, 10,000 armed people will get somewhere. Once in a while the citizens have to remind the police who runs the country especially when faced with hunting rifles that go straight through vests.

I am not advocating violence, in fact I despise violence, but, your government is out of control and only one force in the entire US has the capability to stand up to them. That would be "We The People."

P

reply to post by pheonix358


If you'd know the actual constitution it quite clearly says "peaceably to assemble". These turds are not peacefull by any definition. You wouldn't be saying that if they chose your drive way to express their "free speech".

reply to post by seeker1963


They weren't under arrest. They were ordered to disperse. After failing to do so they could be arrested.

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


It's right there in the article. Check it out.

PsykoOps
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

It's right there in the article. Check it out.

Yeah, I can read. Now, put on your thinking cap and add some analysis to your commentary. You are saying he should get workman's comp because there were protesters in the street. That doesn't make sense. I might be more inclined to understand your point of view if you had said something along the lines of, "He was injured by negative press for doing his job".. as THAT is the crux of the argument, not whether or not he was acting in accordance with his job.