Why Eric Garner protests in Berkeley are particularly hard to control

While police tried a range of crowd-control methods, the sorts of spontaneous demonstrations sparked by the Eric Garner and Michael Brown cases are very challenging from a community policing perspective, experts say.

Gabriel Reyes/AP
In this photo provided by Gabriel Reyes, a man talks on the phone at a Radio Shack that was vandalized overnight in Berkeley, Calif., as protesters angered by police killings in Missouri and New York demonstrated in the streets.

As protests over the Eric Garner grand jury decision continue to spread, the college town of Berkeley erupted over the weekend in two nights of activism punctuated by violent vandalism.

How and when the police responded in this city of some 100,000 residents is providing a useful snapshot of how law enforcement still faces serious challenges in handling spontaneous, violent protests, say police and criminal justice experts as well as activists themselves.

Despite Berkeley’s decades-long tradition of political protests, the city’s law enforcement was little better prepared to deal with random violence during the protests than other small town police departments such as Ferguson, Mo., says Philip Stinson, assistant professor in the criminal justice program at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.

“My sense is that this is an ongoing problem of police training, and there is always a new generation coming along,” he says.

Beyond that, he adds, the sorts of spontaneous demonstrations sparked by the Garner and Michael Brown cases are very challenging from a community policing and planning perspective.

 “It’s one thing when you’re dealing with a major city such as Washington or New York, where protesters have permits and there are leaders and organizers the police can talk to,” Professor Stinson says. “There is all sorts of stuff that can go on in terms of communication and preparation.”

But handling freshly minted groups with many agendas and voices – including a small fringe with purely criminal intentions – is very difficult, he says, “especially in cities such as Berkeley where you have people coming in with no other intention than to take advantage of the moment to do bad things.”

Over the weekend, stores were smashed, fires were lit, and at least five people were arrested, at the same time as crowds of largely peaceful protesters marched through both Berkeley and neighboring Oakland, according to the Berkeley Police Department

Throughout the two-day spree, police responded with tactics ranging from tear gas, batons, and paramilitary tanks and guns with rubber bullets to less aggressive strategies such as channeling the direction of the march and splitting the groups into smaller crowds.

The various tactics did little to prevent the escalating violence and looting throughout the weekend, eyewitnesses say.

Attorney Brian Hofer followed the coverage on Saturday night and then went out on the street Sunday night as the protesters moved through the town. That night, random incidents of violence such as setting a police vehicle afire, smashing store windows, and spray-painting graffiti proliferated.

He points out that the police tactics were notably different between Saturday and Sunday nights. On Saturday, at least five mutual aid police departments joined in from nearby communities such as Alameda, Contra Costa, Oakland, and Pleasanton. This mélange provided its own lessons, he notes.

“It seemed clear that the various mutual aid agencies were not communicating with each other very well,” he says. One group was working to walk a crowd back while another was aggressively using tear gas, tanks and rubber bullets.

“It was really just sort of chaos,” he says, adding that the aggressive show of force by police Saturday night did little to calm the crowds down.

On Sunday, he said he only saw evidence of the Berkeley Police Department, who showed more restraint.

There are no easy fixes, says Tod Burke, a former Maryland police officer and professor of criminal justice at Radford University in Virginia.

He notes that in the past, protests were largely local. As social media turns even the smallest local event into a national moment, Professor Burke says, every police department from Minnesota to Florida has to be looking at cities like Berkeley and trying to figure out what they can learn and how they can apply lessons to their own unique communities.

“It used to be very localized, but now what happens in one part of the country affects the other parts as well,” he says, adding, “what works in one area may not work in another, but they have to be asking the questions.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why Eric Garner protests in Berkeley are particularly hard to control
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today