I watched 14 police officers take down a one-legged homeless Black man outside Twitter HQ
Chaédria LaBouvier
1.4K122

{{ See end of this response as to why the police were called }}

This is not journalism. That would require facts, objectiveness, honesty. It’s one of the most inaccurate and highly biased accounting of an event I’ve read in a very long time. Ms. LaBouviere ought to be embarrassed at this article. And so should you, if you fell for it. It should also be noted that the article seems to have been edited a few times since its initial publishing, most likely because numerous people are pointing out the lies and exaggeration that Ms. LaBouvier is guilty of.

For instance…

“Officers stomped on his prosthetic leg” — FALSE

05 secs — the officer is restraining his ACTUAL leg, not his prosthetic leg by stepping on it. Regardless, having a prosthetic limb does not give one the right to behave unlawfully or with deviant behavior.

Just because a limb is prosthetic, doesn’t mean it isn’t dangerous (in fact, in most instances it is more so). Nor does it mean that by virtue of not being biological, it should not be restrained. It’s absurd to think “it shouldn’t be touched no matter what” which is what appears to be the author’s view in this story and in the video. The officers are within their rights and training to protect themselves and others by subduing a suspect by confining their limbs, EVEN if said limbs are prosthetic.

“Officers man-handled his head” — FALSE

09 secs — we see an officer concerned that the man is trying to bite him. He brings it up twice.

Restraining the head is necessary to prevent the suspect from causing harm to others or himself. The man is resisting the officers. That’s why the officers are restraining him. It’s not because he’s homeless. It’s not because he’s black. SF, particularly is one of the friendliest cities in the country towards the homeless. Officers don’t go around harassing homeless out of boredom or quotas. They respond to complaints and deviant behavior.

Bad Maths

“14 Police Officers Take Down a One-Legged Homeless Black Man” — FALSE

14 officers did not come to “take down” a homeless man. At the time the video begins, there are 5 officers on the scene. Nothing out of the ordinary there. And shortly into the incident, only 3 are restraining the man (apparently they called a mental health

Other officers were needed because of the crowd. Safety is a part of the officers’ job. That includes the safety of the man, the crowd, and the officers themselves. When a large crowd gathers, more officers are needed. How Ms LaBouvier was not aware of this (particularly being an alleged journalist) is beyond me.

Bias exposed, and it isn’t pretty

1:41 secs — Ms LaBouvier exposes her gross ignorance and high class by calling the officers “absolute pigs” for doing their job. They did exactly what they are supposed to do, did not violate any policy, did not exercise unnecessary force.

She continues to object to officers restraining him by being on his prosthetic leg. It does not matter if it is prosthetic or biological! If officers restrain only one leg, that prosthetic leg, if moved, has the potential to cause a lot of harm to officers, the man, or even damaging itself. It’s absurd to think that prosthetic limbs are “holy” artifacts that are beyond consideration.

8:10 secs — Ms LaBouvier claims it is excessive force. She again, exposes a gross ignorance of terminology, policy, and law. A cursory review of legal terms, policies, and legal expectations, even at online law sites, would prove beneficial and prevent such embarrassing declarations in the future. The officers showed considerable professionalism and restraint. They kept the man, themselves, and the public safe during the event.

“Four officers are pinning down the man!” — FALSE

8:20 secs — If you are wanting to be taken seriously as a journalist, then don’t fabricate untruths, report facts.

There are 3 officers restraining the man, and these 3 do so for the vast majority of the time. One for the upper body, one for the mid-section, and one for the legs. That’s the safest way to restrain someone who resists (which is what he does several times) when you have the available resources (# of officers). The situation remained as calm and controlled as it did because of the proper policy and procedure used by the SFPD.

Crazy, illeducated activism rears its ugly head…

8:30 secs — now it all seems to make sense. The ignorance of what is happening, false claims, and silly derogatory remarks made all now makes sense. She exposes that she is not in fact a journalist…but just an activist blogger (and poor one at that since she struggles with discerning reality from fantasy) by what happens next.

She charges that this is an example of “white supremacy in action.” Never mind the proper procedure. Never mind the fact that there are 2 African-American officers on the scene and at least 1 Asian. I suppose they are all just Uncle Tom’s. It absolutely cannot be that proper policy and safety measures were used. It must be, no matter what, by virtue of wearing a uniform, a racist endeavor.

10:22 secs — Ms LaBouvier suggests that the man is safe from being killed only because he is being filmed. More nonsense, although it’s not entirely unexpected as by now, we have come to realize that this is not a piece of journalism, but seemingly, just a politicized event used to fuel an ill-thought-out rant of a social issue.

Journalism requires an objective mind and honesty…and that clearly is not the case in Ms LaBouvier’s reporting.

— — Thanks to Jonah Owen Lamb with the San Fransisco Examiner, for providing the response from the SFPD Captain on this case:

For your convenience, and from the SFPD report:

  1. The man started waving “sticks” (presumably his crutches) in public, in a threatening matter. A citizen reported the incident.
  2. Upon arriving on the scene, officers told the man to put down the “sticks.” The man refused, walked away, and raised the “sticks” in a threatening manner.
  3. The man continued to ignore officers’ commands to stop. He refused and walked into traffic telling the officers he did not care if he got hit by a car.
  4. Officers determined (via policy) that an ERIW (unit with non-lethal weapon) was needed. When ERIW arrived on scene , the man placed his “sticks” on the ground. Officers determined that the man was in an altered mental state and fit the requirement for a Mental Health Detention.
  5. Officers attempt to place handcuffs on the man. The man resists and falls forward. Officers hold him and allow his body weight to take him to the ground.
  6. The man tried to bite officers and use both his legs to kick officers. Officers subdued the man and prevented him from continuing to doing so.
  7. The man was taken to a hospital for evaluation due to his altered mental state.